Using plausible deniability against a systematically lying adversary

The Internet has been buzzing with reactions to the latest Stratfor report about how a military confrontation between Russia and the United States would play out. I did not find the full text, I suppose it is behind a Stratfor paywall or for subscribers only (and, frankly, I have better use for my time and money than to subscribe to that rubbish), but since the same excerpts are quoted everywhere, I might as well list them here and assume that they form the highlights of the article. Here we go (taken from the Business Insider quoting and paraphrasing the original article):

While Russia has some advanced surface-to-air missile systems and very agile fighter aircraft in Syria, it wouldn’t fare well in what would be a short, brutal air war against the US (…) Russia has “about 25 planes, only about ten of which are dedicated to air superiority (Su-35s and Su-30s), and against that they’ll have to face fifth-gen stealth fighters, dozens of strike fighters, F-15s, F-16s, as well as B-1 and B-52 bombers. And of course the vast US Navy and pretty much hundreds of Tomahawks.” “Russians have a lot of air defenses, they’re not exactly defenseless by any means,” Lamrani told Business Insider, “But the US has very heavy air superiority.” Even though individual Russian platforms come close to matching, and in some ways exceed the capability of US jets, it comes down to numbers. If US surveillance detected a mass mobilization of Russian jets in response to the back-and-forth, the US wouldn’t just wait politely for Russians to get their planes in the sky so they can fight back. Instead, a giant salvo of cruise missiles would pour in from the USS George H. W. Bush carrier strike group, much like the April 7 strike on Syria’s Sharyat air base. But this time, the missiles would have to saturate and defeat Russia’s missile defenses first, which they could do by sheer numbers if not using electronic attack craft. Then, after neutering Russia’s defenses, the ships could target the air base, not only destroying planes on the ground but also tearing up the runways, so no planes could take off. At this point US and Coalition aircraft would have free reign to pass overhead and completely devastate Russian forces.

So is the author, Omar Lamrani, right in his assessment? Yes and no. Yes, that is exactly what would happen if the Russians decided to engage their small number of air superiority aircraft to try to prevail over the entire CENCOM and NATO air force for the control of the Syrian skies. And no, simply because the Russians would never do that.

The author of the article, a civilian with no military experience, makes a basic mistake, he assumes that the Russians will act like idiots and fight the kind of war the US would want to impose upon them. That is kind of assumptions most newbies make and which make for excellent propaganda articles. The problem is, of course, that there is absolutely no reason at all why the Russians should collaborate with such a ridiculous scenario. So, let’s get back to basics here.

Question 1: are the Russians in a position of weakness in Syria?

Yes, absolutely. And they know that too. First, the Russians are operating only 2 facilities (Tartus and Khmeimim), far away from home, and the size of their task force in Syria is tiny compared to the huge amount of firepower available to the AngloZionists and their allies. Second, the USA have poured billions of dollars into this region to make sure that the Soviet Union could never successfully invade Iran and not only do they have an immense numerical superiority over the Russians, they also have a world-class network of bases where even more forces can be brought in. Syria is squeezed between CENTCOM to the south and east and NATO to the north and west while the closets Russian forces are in Crimea. The truth is that not only could the US and NATO take control of the Syrian skies, even Israel alone could probably do it. So, assuming the Russians are not suicidal imbeciles, what do you think they should do? If you were Russian, how would you play your cards?

Question 2: do the Russians have advantages of their own?

Absolutely. In fact, they have many advantages over the Americans. Here they are in no particular order:

All the boots on the ground that matter are either Russian allies or at least on good terms with Russia: the Syrians, the Iranians, Hezbollah and even Turkey are all much closer to Russia than to the AngloZionists. The only AngloZionist boots on the ground that matter are Daesh & Co.

Internal public opinion: in Russia, the Russian military intervention is understood and backed by a overwhelming majority of Russians. In the USA the public is clueless and profoundly skeptical of this latest US war of choice. Not only that, but Putin personally has an immense credibility with the Russian people, while Trump is barely avoiding being impeached.

External public opinion: while in the USA the Ziomedia is engaged in a truly heroic effort to avoid even mentioning the fact that even the US presence in, and nevermind the actual aggression against, Syria is completely illegal in terms of international law, most of the planet is quite aware of that. This only further erodes the US standing worldwide.

The Russians have fewer lucrative targets to offer the AngloZionists than the Americans. Simply put, the Russians have Tartus and Khmeimim. The Americans have an long list of bases and facilities in the region which all could become potential targets.

The willpower, courage and determination of the Russian solider is stronger than his US counterparts by many orders of magnitude. There are many reasons for this, historical as well as political, but I don’t think that anybody doubts the fact that while Americans love to kill for their country, they are much less enthusiastic about dying for it, especially when the “for it” part is extremely dubious and when the frontline solider feels that he is being used in some complex political game which he does not understand but where he is definitely used as cannon fodder.

There is Russian personnel and military hardware interspersed within the Syrian forces. We know that Russian technical specialists, military advisors and special forces are operating on the ground in Syria. This means that the Russian can probably use a Syrian S-300 to shoot down a US aircraft without necessarily giving the US proof of their involvement. To use and old CIA term, the Russian can have “plausible deniability”.

We know that Russia has a vastly superior intelligence capability in Syria as reflected in the kind of damage Russian air and missile strike inflict on their targets especially when compared to the painfully obvious lack of US understanding of what’s really going on on the ground.

So what does all this add up to?

1) Plausible deniability in the air

First, it is pretty darn clear that the Russians have no incentive to begin a large scale air battle in the skies of Syria with their US counterparts. However, the fact that such a battle would not be in their interest does not mean that they would necessarily avoid it either. For the time being, the Russians seem to have chose a strategy of deliberate uncertainty and harassment of the US aircraft, but they could decide to engage US aircraft using their ground based S-300/S-400 batteries. Here is how they could do it.

First, the Russians are the only ones in Syria with S-400s. So let’s set them aside for a minute and keep them for serious emergency purposes. Next, let’s look at the Syrian inventory of air defenses found on Wikipedia. Notice especially this one: the Pantsir-S1 (SA-22). According to Wikipedia, there are 50 SA-22 in Syria. Have you ever heard of the Panstsir-S1? Probably not.

Forget the S-300/S-400, think Pantsir

The Pantsir-S1 (aka “SA-22” in US/NATO classification) is an absolutely awe-inspiring air defense system, yet nobody in the general public or Ziomedia ever mentions it. Let’s take a look at it:

The Pantsir-S1 is mobile short to medium range surface-to-air missile and anti-aircraft artillery weapon system which uses phased array radars for both target acquisition and tracking. Detection range: 32-45km (20-28mi). Tracking range: 24-28km (15-17mi). It can track up to 20 targets, engage up to 3 with 4 missiles at the same time. It has a secondary Autonomous Optoelectronic System with a 25km (15mi) engagement rage against a small F-16 size aircraft. The Pantsir’s missiles are solid-fuel rockets with a range of 20km (12mi), a ceiling of 15km (9mi) and a speed of Mach 2.3-2.8. The Pantsir also has two dual 30mm autocannons shooting up to 700 rounds of high explosive at a rate of 2’500 rounds per minute at a distance up to 4km (2.5mi). Now here is the really neat thing about it: both the Russian and the Syrian operate these mobile systems. In other words, not only might these Pantsirs be anywhere, but they might be operated by anybody. Heck, even the Iranians have them!

Though the Pantsirs look the part (they look like something out of a Terminator movie to me), they are even more dangerous than they appear because while they are capable of fully autonomous operations, they are also designed to be plugged-in into a global network via a digitally encrypted datalink which makes it possible for them to receive their engagement data from other land-based and airborne platforms. Finally, keep in mind that nobody really knows how many Pantsirs the Russians have brought with them to Syria, how many the Syrians currently operate, how many “Syrian” Pantsirs are operated by Russians and plugged in into the Russian digital air-defense network or, for that matter, how many Syrian and Iranian Pantsirs might be out there.

So what do we have? A system which is extremely mobile (being mounted on a heavy high mobility truck), easy to conceal (being small), which can engage any airborne target at altitudes ranging form 0m to 15’000m as far as 20’000m away. To do so, they can used their passive electronically scanned array (PESA), their Autonomous Optoelectronic System (AOS) or even data received from other radars including Russian S-300/S-400, Su-35 or AWACS.

Initially and officially, the Russian Pantsirs are solely tasked with defending the longer ranged S-300/S-400 systems and the Russian installations in Khmeimim and Tartus. But in reality they could be rapidly deployed anywhere and used to shoot down US aircraft with no evidence whatsoever that the Russians did it! Of course, the Russian would have to be very careful as to what source they would use to track the US aircraft and provide the Pantsir’s missile an engagement solution. As far as I know, the Pantsir’s missiles do not have an active or even semi-active radar system, but their AOS allows for completely silent/passive engagements. Depending on what intelligence assets the Americans do or do not have available at the time of attack, their might be no way of proving who shot down the US aircraft.

The bottom line is this: while the world is focused on the bigger S-300/S-400 capabilities, the Russians already have in place a far more flexible short-medium range air-defense system which would be impossible to destroy with Tomahawks (being mobile) and very hard to destroy with airstrikes. That system could be deployed anywhere in Syria and it could be used while providing the Russian with a plausible deniability. Of course, the US could try to fly outside the Pantsir’s flight envelope, but that would make use of any airpower very difficult. Another option for the Americans would be to rely solely on their low-RCS aircraft (B-1, B-2 for strikes, and F-22s to protect them), but that would dramatically decrease the overall capabilities of CENTOM/NATO over Syria.

I will conclude this section by reminding everybody that neither the US nor any other NATO country has ever had to operate in an environment as dangerous as the Syrian skies. The poor Serbs had only ancient air defenses and yet even against them NATO failed miserably. In Syria the Russian air defenses could give the Americans a run for their money without ever using any of their (admittedly few) air superiority aircraft.

2) Plausible deniability on the ground

Has anybody ever considered that the Russians might decide to attack US forces deployed on the ground in Syria (or Iraq for that matter?)? Apparently not, if only because most people would assume that the Russian force in Syria is tiny and therefore cannot attack a much larger and stronger US force. But, just as with the air warfare, this is a mistaken assumption based on the idea that the US would know who is attacking. In reality, the Russians could attack the US using their special forces (either those already deployed or specially brought in) to attack US targets and retain plausible deniability.

How?

This is what we already know:

Russian operators are already deployed and active in Syria:

First the famous Spetsnaz ( Spetsnaz GRU Gsh). These are special units drawn either from the Southern Military District or, possibly, subordinated directly to the Military Intelligence (GRU) HQ in Moscow. Unlike the Spetsnaz GRU forces of the GRU brigades of the Military Districts, these small groups (8-12 men) are staffed by career officers only.

Next, the Russian Special Forces (SSO), a relatively new creation not to be confused with the Spetsnaz GRU even if they are similar in many ways, are also more or less officially in Syria (Russian TV channels have made reports and interviews with them). They are subordinated to General Staff of the Armed Forces. Here is a photo of them taken by a Russian journalist in Syria:

Finally, there аre reports of some unnamed but very secret Russian unit working in Syria (for example here) but neither Vympel nor Zaslon fit the bill (the former is now subordinated to the FSB, i.e. deal with internal security issues, while the latter is more of a protective service for officials, their residences and Russian civilians abroad). I have found no info on who they are, but my guess is that they are what Vympel used to be: special forces of the Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) working in close collaboration with the SVR agent networks in Syria.

Whatever may be the case, the Russians already have more then enough special forces in Syria to start attacking US targets in Syria or even elsewhere in the region. For example, during the battle for Aleppo there have been numerous reports of Russian snipers killing Daesh leader one after the other almost decapitating their entire leadership. That could happen to top US officers on the ground in Syria. Special forces could also arrange for “unexplicable” missile strikes hitting US forces. But the most important aspect here is that these forces could be used in complete secrecy with nothing identifying them as Russians. They would look like Arabs, speaks like Arabs and have Arabic IDs with them. The Soviets did use exactly this technique in Afghanistan to overthrow Afghan President Hafizullah Amin. Likewise, Chechen President Ramzan Kadyrov has openly admitted that Chechen operators have been infiltrated into the Daesh command structure.. Finally, even if “Russians” are caught and somehow identified, there are about 5’000 Russian citizens of all sorts of ethnic groups (including Slavs) fighting in the ranks of Daesh and it will be impossible to prove that fighter X or fighter Z are agents of a Russian intelligence service.

Bottom line is this: Russia also has the option of ground attacks against US forces with plausible deniability.

So think of it – Russians SAMS shooting at US aircraft in the air, and Russian special forces killing US officers on the ground. And all this with complete plausible deniability.

Not convinced yet?

One the many uses of plausible deniability, especially against a systematically lying enemy

You might wonder how useful plausible deniability is against a country which makes up all sorts of ridiculous stories about Russian hackers stealing elections or invisible Russian armies in the eastern Ukraine. And I agree, a country which has 16 intelligence agencies and a long and shameful history of making up intelligence – yes, sure, they could say that “the Russkies did it” and have the Ziomedia repeat it all over and over again without any evidence.

But there is another side to this story: since the US propaganda machine has made up so many stories about genocidal Serbs, Viagra-enhanced raping Libyans, baby-tossing Iraqis, wannabe-nuclear Iranians, barrel-bombing Syrians and God knows who else – how credible will they be when they accuse the Russian of “this vicious and dastardly act” (whatever the act is, really)? Even as I write this, there are reports that the White House is already setting the stage for yet another false flag attack in Syria. Let’s be honest here and agree that Uncle Sam lies every time he moves his lips and while the brain-dead Ziomedia pretends to take each lie very seriously, the rest of the planet, including much of the American public, is under no illusions.

Now imagine a Russian operated Pantsir-S1 crew in Syria shooting down US aircraft or Russian operators blowing up a tent with the HQ of the US forces in Syria. Not only will there be no proof that the Russians did it, but even if there was, nobody would trust the Americans anyway. Furthermore, this also begs the following question: would it really be in the USA’s best interest to point the finger at the Russians? I would argue that it would not. It would make far more sense to blame the Syrians, then bomb some kind of Syrian government building (say the probably empty military intelligence building in downtown Damascus) and declare that “a message has been sent” then to take the military and political risk of attacking Russian forces in Syria.

Could the Americans retaliate in kind?

Probably not. Remember, they don’t have the boots on the ground, the intelligence capabilities or the political support (internal and external) to get away with that. Not only that, but US special forces have a long history of screwing up even relatively simple operations and I don’t see them trying to get away with a direct attack on Russian forces in Khmeimim or elsewhere. At most, they will do what they almost always do – subcontract the mission to some locals, which works great against defenseless civilians and ends up on disaster against a real “hard” target.

The many paradoxes of warfare

First, we should always keep in mind that any military action is just a means towards a political goal, the “continuation of politics by other means”. Because of that highly political nature, there are circumstances where being the weaker side can yield advantages. The key to the defensive strategy of the weaker side is not to let the stronger side impose the kind of warfare which maximizes the stronger side’s advantages. In the case of Syria, trying to defeat the entire air force of CENTCOM with just a few fighters would be plain stupid. And since the US does have an immense advantage in the number of cruise missiles it can launch – do what the Serbs did in Kosovo and Hezbollah did in 2006 against Israel: don’t give them a target. In the Syrian context this means: use only mobile air defense systems. Last but not least, hit the Americans were it hurts most – their morale. Remember how crazy they got when they could not find out who was attacking them in Vietnam?

An elephant in a porcelain store is a scary sight for sure. But once you get over your initial fear, you soon will realize that being a big bad elephant makes it very difficult to make a smart move. That is exactly the USA’s problem, especially the US armed forces: they are so big and confident that almost every move they make lacks to sophisticated caution imposed by life on a much weaker actor. This is why the almost always end up breaking the store and looking stupid. Add to this a quasi-total focus on the short-term quickfix, and you get a recipe for disaster.

The two options for a Russian counter-attack under the cover of plausible deniability are just the two that came to my mind. In reality there are many more, including many even much less “visible” than those I have suggested. My main goal was to illustrate that there is absolutely no reason for the Russians to behave like Omar Lamrani suggested in his frankly silly article. The truth is that I have absolutely no idea how the Russians might respond, and that is exactly how it should be. All I am sure of is that they won’t respond how Lamrani thinks they will, that’s all.

The wiser folks in the Pentagon and, apparently, on the ground are trying hard to avoid getting tangled up with the Russians not because they fear some specific Russian response, but because they are aware that they are dealing with an unpredictable and sophisticated actor. The good news is that the Russians are also trying hard to avoid getting tangled up with the Americans, especially so far away from home and smack in the middle of a thoroughly CENTCOM/NATO-controlled part of the world.

In conclusion, I want to mention just a small sampling of what I did not mention but which US commanders will have to consider before deciding on a direct attack on Russian forces: various naval scenarios, especially those involving diesel attack submarines, Russian options to deploy into Iran, Russian retaliatory options in other theaters such as Iraq, Pakistan and, especially, Afghanistan. Here is a good one: *real* Russian cracking (“hacking” is the wrong word) of crucial US computer networks, including the release of possibly very embarrassing information (think of it as “Wikileaks on steroids”). Finally, if cornered, one possibly option for Russia would be to draw US forces, resources and energy away from Syria to some other region truly critical to the USA. DPRK anybody?

The options are endless and the stakes very high. In the dreamworld of Mr Lamrani it’s all simple and easy. Which only goes to prove, yet again, that war is far to serious a matter to entrusted to civilians.

The Saker

The Essential Saker III: Chronicling The Tragedy, Farce And Collapse of the Empire in the Era of Mr MAGA

Leave a Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to get more info on formatting

(1) Leave the name field empty if you want to post as Anonymous. It's preferable that you choose a name so it becomes clear who said what. E-mail address is not mandatory either. The website automatically checks for spam. Please refer to our moderation policies for more details. We check to make sure that no comment is mistakenly marked as spam. This takes time and effort, so please be patient until your comment appears. Thanks.

(2) 10 replies to a comment are the maximum.

(3) Here are formating examples which you can use in your writing:
<b>bold text</b> results in bold text
<i>italic text</i> results in italic text
(You can also combine two formating tags with each other, for example to get bold-italic text.)
<em>emphasized text</em> results in emphasized text
<strong>strong text</strong> results in strong text
<q>a quote text</q> results in a quote text (quotation marks are added automatically)
<cite>a phrase or a block of text that needs to be cited</cite> results in:a phrase or a block of text that needs to be cited
<blockquote>a heavier version of quoting a block of text...</blockquote> results in:

a heavier version of quoting a block of text that can span several lines. Use these possibilities appropriately. They are meant to help you create and follow the discussions in a better way. They can assist in grasping the content value of a comment more quickly.

and last but not least:
<a href=''http://link-address.com''>Name of your link</a> results in Name of your link

(4)No need to use this special character in between paragraphs:&nbsp;You do not need it anymore. Just write as you like and your paragraphs will be separated.The "Live Preview" appears automatically when you start typing below the text area and it will show you how your comment will look like before you send it.

(5) If you now think that this is too confusing then just ignore the code above and write as you like.

LOL, first, for better or worse, Russia has a “non-aggression pact” with Israel re: Syrian air traffic.

Second, the Israelis allegedly struck the source of a mortar shell which landed in Israel-controlled areas of the Golan Heights. Aircraft missiles have a longer range than mortars, meaning, Israel warplanes did not need to enter Syrian airspace to conduct the alleged strike.

What’s going on is Realpolitik. Sure, Russia could easily shoot down an Israeli jet, and then what? The US (maybe) goes all in on WW3 (4,5,6? take your pick). We obviously are still deluded enough to think we can “win” in a war with Russia.

The Russian’s are purposely withholding showing their hand in Syria and Ukraine in regards the full capabilities of their weapon systems and capabilities. They know their response times and systems to provocations by the Israeli’s and US&Co forces are being vigorously tested….but still they wait for the timing to be right…Timing should always be of your own choosing when you engage in battle and when your response comes it should be devastating, overwhelming and complete…..Russia and China both individually and together have the means to totally take out the US/Israeli banking/military/industrial complex yet they refrain to do so in the hope that the former will wake up and co-operate…but the US/Israeli are like delusional, drug addicted and bloated bullies who will not listen to reason until they are beaten into to pulp and left to die in the gutter…

But, isnt Russia or Syria forces shooting down a USA aircraft exactly what USA want? Wont that give the excuse they need for a full-scale invasion of Syria taking out Assad? Even if Russia does it in a such a way that there is no proof, that wont matter, all that is needed is an american aircraft downed and a CIA agent saying “It was likely Russia”

The Saker is appealing to a totally unreliable and biased source that limits itself to transcribe a script written by Mossad headquarters.

Additionally, Israel has already humiliated Russia several times in Syria (and keeps doing that with total impunity); apparently the “mighty” Russian Aerospace Forces, Air Defense and Anti-Missile Forces based at Khmeimim Air Base, are still today incapable to deter any incursion carried out by the IDF/AF.

The Russian Federation -and Iran by extension- have lost total credibility in the ongoing war in Syria.

If you are weaker than your adversary, you should avoid the battle for as long as possible unless/until your ultimate survival is at stake. Russia could lose everything it has endeavored to achieve in Syria, and still remain independent and a viable adversary to the United States.

As it is, Russia had secured the Assad Baathist regime. That is a big accomplishment.

Now, Russia is helping Syria to regain territory all the way to its eastern border with Iraq. The Syrians are making progress to that end; but it is apparent that the United States opposes that development. Taking a few hits from the Americans is frustrating; but that is secondary to the recapture of lost territories.

You however doesn’t count too much in Universe. USA already lost supremacy in world. In the near future will become insignificant and time will come for USA to pay for all their crimes. USA base on its carriers and and missiles in every war. The same happens now. But when USA will start the war against Russia will be forced to lead wars in Europe, Asia, Middle East and their territory. Plus, USA will be confronted with an unchained nature; tornadoes, floods, earthquakes….

The USA is supreme in the world with a 600 billion usd military budget it dwarfs the rest of the planet put together, and USA will likely not become insignificant in the coming 100 years.

USA is a huge country with a huge population and enormous resources. There are very few scenarios in which USA would become insignificant, the only one I can imagine is if there are so much ethnic conflict due to mass immigration that’ USA actually broke apart into several smaller countries and then these countries where engage in permanent war with each other with different sides funded by Russia and China and other actors, barring that USA will always be among the top countries on earth.

U.S.’s national electric grid is maxed out and in danger of breaking down, last upgraded 75 years ago.

With so many elite and Ivy league schools, the U.S. cant seem to get a rocket engine to work, thus is and has been relying on the Russian RD-170, and now the RD-180.

The U.S. relies on Russia for the disposal of its Uranium because it no longer has the technology to do such. The U.S. had been building a massive facility but the project was halted due to it not functioning correctly.

Chinese mega-cities now put U.S. cities to shame.

Most States in the U.S. are operating in the red. With cities such as Los Angeles, Chicago, Las Vegas etc completely bankrupt. They are currently drawing on city pension money and lottery sales. They are also relying on cigarette and alcohol taxes. Real nice.

Senior citizens, the disabled and the mentally ill are getting Medicare and Medicaid cut from them. Of course, we know that Americas prisons and jails are now serving as home for the mentally ill.

I could go on and on, but the saddest part is the U.S. spends 680+ billion on defense, while all this is going on.

The American Society of Civil Engineers ( yes, the same folks who said 9-11 was a controlled demolition ) , said that the Government must , without delay fix the countries infrastructure, and it would cost around 4-6 Trillion, to start.

The U.S. government, thru Obama, just awarded the Dept Of Energy 1 Trillion over 10 years to develop ‘friendly, battlefield type , small nuclear weapons.

The U.S has a hard choice to make, either oust the nefarious, war mongering, racial supremacists, the God awful Talmudic Jews from positions of power and influence, or the U.S. faces a future similar to what Russia went thru in the 20th century.

well said , American political elites dragging America to oblivion , that said , we all should 1) PAX AMERICANA , 2) American political guiding principle is FULL SPECTRUM DOMINANCE = there will never be peace in the world as long as America can dominate militarily anytime and anywhere in our world

1. A 600 billion usd military budget it dwarfs the rest of the planet put together on overspending. You incorrectly propose that a higher military spending automatically amounts to military effective power, while the fact remains the largest segment of that money is gobbled up by the banks that own the MIC companies producing mostly propaganda concepts with lower real military value such as the F-117 that Serbians took down with an ancient missile air defense complex. Very expensive military hardware such as F-35s laden with failing systems or Zumwalt class destroyers that break down in warm waters are revealing.

2. Insignificant is a completely subjective concept. There is no need for the USA to become insignificant to be ineffective at preventing other countries from achieving geopolitical success. The whole BRICS block is a good example. Endless hubris is the most self-defeating of all conditions.

3. Huge country with a huge population, right. So is China. So is Russia. US GDP is 18 trillion, yeah, but it has a debt of 13 trillion and growing. BRICS nations are over 25% of the world’s land coverage and 40% of the world’s population and hold a combined GDP (PPP) of $20 trillion. This huge GDP has not prevented around 60 million Americans from falling into poverty, btw. Most U.S. cities are in decay, with crumbling infrastructure and underdevelopment in many areas.

4. One of the top countries on Earth, yeah, yet one that spent the 20th century destroying much of the rest of the world as no other nation ever did before, going ballistic upon the 21st century, losing any moral ground to pontificate to the rest of the world.

Excellent list. The only aspect I would like to straighten out is the GDP of 18 trillion. The number is blown up by FIRE (finance, insurance and real estate). If all nations would consider that FIRE doesn’t really add any value at all, then we might get realistic numbers for more precise comparisons on that level.

LOL! That’s a joke right? 600 MUSD is nothing to sneeze at but 600 MUSD of pork barrel politics leaves you with about 6 MUSD of significant “war fighting capability.” Wasting money on subsidies to defense contractors has come up with like, oh, 1 decent plane (Raptor) since the Vietnam war, which was fought, primarily. with WW2 planes.

The American Empire is a dead man walking and the only real question left is the manner of our demise: we can give up our aspirations and try to make peace with our vassels (eg British Empire) or we can burn Like Rome.

I disagree totally with the tone and content. Rather than having lost face, it looks like Russia is showing her partners for peace how to conduct this type of war, namely to limit total casualties and win friends.

When you get over the blind rage of anti-Israel/IDF, you might discover the facts that the Israeli actions are cleared and controlled. They stand off and fire missiles. There are extremely few flights of IDF planes over Syria.

And the most recent one where they reportedly flew over Damascus area they fled for their lives.

Russia actually has prevented the Israelis from flying into Syrian airspace for 1.5 years.
Hitting the Golan and firing missiles from outside the borders of Syria is minimizing IDF power.

There is very good reason why Syria and Hezbollah don’t make much of a stink about the strikes by Israel.
They are ineffectual.

In fact, only people who deride Putin and the Russians from their keyboards safely thousands of miles away seem to be concerned. We see it here all the time.

Reread your comment. You don’t know what the hell you are talking about, but since this is the first time I’ve seen your name, I give you the benefit of the doubt. You don’t know the facts. Thus, your conclusion is erroneous.

Point of fact: Israel is f*cked by Russia being in Syria. A plan begun two decades ago is obliterated and the Israelis are the losers. Russia did that!

And the follow on plan of going to war again against Hezbollah is so nuts, the IDF is split over it. Without a full scale war involving the US as protector, Israel will be dealt a worse beating than in 2006. And the US is not about to go to war in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Iran for Bibi.

Israel has lost bigly in Syria. Their last desperation is to preserve al Nusra as an insurgent force.
Russia will sweep that daydream away with a ferocity that will put a final note to the war. It is inevitable.
Terrorists will be liquidated. That’s the mission. Fighting Israel is for people who don’t understand strategy and Russia’s goals as a superpower.

if memory reliable in vietnam business usa found ways to “toss” a bomb with fair accuracy about 20 miles. this is to say that an aircraft lets go of the thing inside one airspace, and the “bomb” whatever it is flyies like a ballistic missile, which it in fact is, albeit subject to aerodynamic forces and etc. into another airspace…guided gps etc are a sure thing…

civilians seem not to be aware of this and related tricks of war…it screws their thought when they live in imaginary space…

Trying to refute facts (military and political successes too numerous to list) with a belief is the modus operandus of the US deep state. It succeeds only with people unable to recognize that there is a difference between these, and what that is.

The Russians entered Syria to protect their own assets in the country and help the Assad Government fight ISIS. They won’t involve themselves in a Israel Syria dispute unless their people and equipment in country are threatened. Get a grip!

Indeed, so much so that in under 2 years Russia has been able to completely turn the battlefield reality in Syria completely around. Russia has done nothing short of save Syria from assured eradication from the map, in the meantime having dealt a withering blow to the Anglo-American imperial machine. Russia’s credibility has never been greater, since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the attitude of the Washington establishment toward Russia has become hysterical in the extreme for this exact reason. Of course, there are those, like yourself, who would like to play Russia’s incredible achievements down. Waste of time, the facts speak for themselves, the reality in the Middle East – & by extension the wider world – has been radically changed as a consequence of Russia’s intervention in Syria, for all time. As for Iran, well Iran is now on the verge of becoming the leading power in the region following the SAA & PMU’s convergence at the Syria-Iraq border.There is now a direct land link from Iran all the way to Hezbollah territory in southern Lebanon. Hence Israel’s escalating military involvement in Syria. This is also thanks to Russia, all credit is due to the fighters on the ground, the SAA, PMU on the Iraq front, the allied militias (Hezbollah etc.), but it is Russia that made this possible. It is a vast achievement, a death blow to the empire.

Thank you all for your insights, and thank you, Saker, for posting the info on the impressive “Pantsir” system. I admit that I’m also concerned about the accuracy of intel from “Stratfor” but allowing for that, I greatly appreciate this article’s break-down of the David-versus-Goliath struggle unfolding in Syria. I’ve read other writers who believe that Russia has an agreement with Israel to NOT shoot down Israeli aircraft over Syria (now: whether Syria shoots Israeli aircraft down is a different story)—- so the assessment that “Israel has humiliated Russia several times in Syria” may be missing the point. War rapidly becomes an “equal opportunity” humiliation, embarrassment, and out-and-out bloodbath for all sides. Seeing that Israel knows the US is in Israel’s back pocket, this causes them to engage in some risky (or foolish) operations that otherwise they would not get away with. In these crazy times I’m actually far less concerned about what Russia does— and far more concerned about what Israel does. Witness their insane repeated bombings of Gaza. Let us never forget Israel’s attack on the USS Liberty back in the 60’s. Israel is far, far more willing to suck the US into the MidEast quagmire than Russia is. Investigate a monstrous long-term endeavor called the “Greater Israel Project” — this will help explain much of what we are seeing. This “project” is way behind schedule and way over budget, but no worries, America will keep expending itself to do Israel’s bidding until it is completely bankrupt.

As usual, an intelligent explanation of Russia’s capabilities in this politically, dangerous theater of war.

It makes me wonder why President Putin doesn’t quit on his friend, Bashar al-Assad with all the hubris of subtle and overt threats that come from the militarists in control of the Pentagon citadel. Why not succumb to the western influences like his predecessor, Boris Yeltsin? Apparently quitting is not an option for this leader of the Russian Federation, not under these circumstances. It shows me there are men of principle in high office, men who do not cower under duress, men who stand in defiance against evil and use their skills of statesmanship to bring a better outcome for the indigenous people of Syria.

However some difficult questions must be asked assuming the Syrian Alliance (SAA, Russia, Iran Hezbollah, etc.) defeats the Saudi-U.S. proxy in Syria in the near future.

1. What if the U.S. continues to have a military presence in Syria, post-ISIS? How will President Assad “encourage” the coalition invaders to leave, especially since the United Nations is America’s footstool and refuses to take legal action against the U.S.? Remember, Israel still occupies the Golan Heights.

2. What if the U.S. pours more ground troops into eastern Syria under false pretenses. Who will stop them?

These events could happen and Assad, Putin and the Russian Defense Ministry have to plan for it, because such perfidious acts of aggression by the U.S. will be tantamount to Hitler’s invasion of Poland that led to World War II in Europe.

As the Saker’s article makes clear, US troops are vulnerable to being obliterated at any time with plausible deniability. Not enough casualties to justify an escalation, but enough to raise bloody hell in Congress. And, it could all be done in a matter of a few hours.

It’s not like attacking a ship, or even a plane. It’s a matter of obliterating all troops, ISIS and their embedded American masters in ISIS controlled territory.

The endgame will be political, my friend, with a minimum of casualties, but they will be spectacular. Sorry to say, and not meaning to sound sarcastic (though the irony is inescapable), they will have died for peace.

> Why not succumb to the western influences like his predecessor, Boris Yeltsin?

Yeltsyn was operating surrounded by all kinds of pro-USA stoogies inherited from late USSR and power-hungry no-remorse oligarchs.

Wikipedia: On 15 May 1999, Yeltsin survived another attempt of impeachment, this time by the Democratic and communist opposition in the State Duma. He was charged with several unconstitutional activities, including the signing of the Belavezha Accords dissolving the Soviet Union in December 1991, the coup-d’état in October 1993, and initiating the war in Chechnya in 1994. None of these charges received the two-thirds majority of the Duma which was required to initiate the process of impeachment of the president.

Putin has a lot of those around too, but MUCH less than Yeltsyn had. Last one who tried to challenged his power via buying off the parliament was Khodorkovsky. He has more Russian soil to stand upon than Yeltsyn ever did.

Wikipedia: In 1998, a political and economic crisis emerged when Yeltsin’s government defaulted on its debts, causing financial markets to panic and the ruble to collapse in the 1998 Russian financial crisis.

In 1998 Russia was sentenced to pay all USSR-made debts for all the nations.
In 2017 Russia had paid them off.

Wikipedia: During the 1999 Kosovo war, Yeltsin strongly opposed the NATO military campaign against Yugoslavia, and warned of possible Russian intervention if NATO deployed ground troops to Kosovo. In televised comments he stated: “I told NATO, the Americans, the Germans: Don’t push us toward military action. Otherwise there will be a European war for sure and possibly world war.”

Yep, second-in-rank Chernomyrdin betrayed Russia and denounced Russia-bargained terms about Serbia and signed USA-given terms. Guess he thought it would let him become next Yeltsyn. He was wrong.

Wikipedia: In December 1999 while visiting China to seek support on Chechnya, Yeltsin replied to Clinton’s criticism of a Russian ultimatum to citizens of Grozny. He bluntly pronounced: “Yesterday, Clinton permitted himself to put pressure on Russia. It seems he has for a minute, for a second, for half a minute, forgotten that Russia has a full arsenal of nuclear weapons. He has forgotten about that.” Clinton dismissed Yeltsin’s comments stating: “I didn’t think he’d forgotten that America was a great power when he disagreed with what I did in Kosovo.”

See, we may say that in both 2011 and 2014 Putin succumbed to Western pressure and had an option. To threat nuclear strike, as Yeltsyn did, or to cow and to emergently rebuild conventional weapons, like those Saker outline in the article. Putin chosen low-profile approach.

you’re not military i think, but i’m not having a go at you.
i bet you syrian/russian/iranian generals have war gamed every conceivable scenario including yours.
furthermore the american generals will have tried to work out every conceivable rusian/itanian/syrian reaction to your proposed scenarios, and then some.
and on and on. the best laid plans inevitably HAVE to change when the enemy is engaged.

“Plausible deniability” will not have any effect whatsoever when/if the Americans decide to attack/destroy Russian forces, along with Iranian, Syrian, and Hezbollah forces. The Americans are good at destroying things and even better at electronic surveillance, target acquisition and bomb damage assessment. They will systematically blow up everything and everyone. That’s what they do; and they have been doing it since 1942.

The Russian alliance must make the fateful decision either to accept humiliation and suffer only small losses; or to suffer a total defeat, hoping that -in the process- they inflict heavy losses upon the Americans. When/if the time comes to make that decision, I believe that the Russians will choose the latter. But, because such a decision would be so fateful, the Russians might endure a bit of humiliation while waiting for the best chance to inflict the most damage.

I won’t pretend to be a military analyst. So I won’t venture to suggest what the Russians will/an do; nor what measures the Americans will take to counter (and vice versa). But it would be reckless of the Americans to engage the Russian + allied forces in Syria with the belief that the conflict would not spread quickly. There are many old scores to settle. Old and open wounds have been festering.

“The Americans are good at destroying things and even better at electronic surveillance, target acquisition and bomb damage assessment” Yes that its true, but always when they have the uncontested technological superiority, once they do not have the total control the US suffers tremendously like in Korea, Vietnam. Russia is of course in a much superior league than these 2. The US never forgot (or I hope so) how it went in Vietnam so I really hope they show some restrain for their own and everybody s sake.

““Plausible deniability” will not have any effect whatsoever when/if the Americans decide to attack/destroy Russian forces, along with Iranian, Syrian, and Hezbollah forces.”

And how did you imagine the Americans would ‘destroy’ these war-hardened forces who are fighting for their lifes if these same ‘Americans’ couldn’t/can’t even destroy the Taleban nor hold on to the Afghan territory they once occupied, spending billions? You’re kidding, right?

Yea you might be right I dont remember the facts back then. The only thing that get stuck in my mind was from the film “Apocalypse now” looking at the terrified American soldiers and Vietnamese collaborators running away from then advancing Vietcong. Then again what you mention implies the use of air force ie. “fighting” from long distance that seems to suit best to the US army. Dont forget that that would not be the case against Russia, China or maybe even Iran. If the US wants to succeed against any of them it has to fight with boots on the ground and thats the problem!

The reason was he already had a deal with North Vietnam, from the American side because the US public was overwhelmingly against the war after huge losses of soldiers and money, to reject the offers of peace from LBJ – so that Nixon could appear to be a peacemaker to the US public. He was prepared to sacrifice US soldiers, Vietnamese civilians and lots of money just to win the election. North Vietnam never asked for terms, they were prepared to continue fighting, in the North and South, to the end. The last few US personnel and their collaborators from the crooked South Vietnam puppet government had to be airlifted out of the embassy. Get your facts straight – the USA couldn’t win in Vietnam because they were basically trying to fight against the entire country, impossible to win without killing everyone. Same story in Iraq, Afghanistan and now Syria. The US public can’t handle losing US lives, and the financial strain from the wars of the last decade and a bit is destroying the country. Sooner or later, they will make a deal with the Russians and leave. This idea of a full-on US invasion of Syria is just fantasy, the troops are not coming. Trump is presiding over a collapsing presidency while the Republican Congress is clueless about how to manage a fake economy with no real productive capacity. Israel is just trying to gain a few more KMs of other people’s land, as usual, but not succeeding so far.

The US public can’t handle losing US lives
Of course not, you’re talking about killing my children and grandchildren; like the rest of the world, we love our children. That’s why the sociopaths who run things decided to use drones and Al-Qaida and the rest of our mercenaries to fight our proxy wars for us.

Document the overflights of Syria by Israel.
Damn few and far between.

Syria is not going to take on the US.
Russia is dealing with US airpower.

It’s amazing how so many folks comment on military strategy and tactics and no nothing of either.

Syria is winning the ground war. She is retaking all of her territory back.
The Russian-Iranian-Syrian strategy and tactics are dominating the war.

Why start a sideshow war? The violations of Syrian sovereignty leave the Coalition and Israel open to international suits over damages. The human toll alone brought by the US to innocent Syrians is worth billions.

The US stands beaten and disgraced. Israel has three regional rivals, Russia, Iran and Turkey. The Syrian War is a huge turning point in the history of the Hegemon.
Hard to see it just yet. But it’s shaping up.

“It’s amazing how so many folks comment on military strategy and tactics and know nothing of either.”

Agreed, in one sense.

But in another, no, not really. It’s the common human condition of unconsciousness and source of all four of the following:

1. Folly in others and in oneself
2. Humor, derived from observing the folly of others.
3. Tragedy from suffering the errors oneself.
4 Sadness and remorse in reflecting on the tragedy one has suffered because of one’s own folly or believing in the folly of others (MSM, PTB, etc).

Not that many people regularly reflect on what they really know and what they don’t know, at all. At least clueless commentators are “on the playing field” trying to “work out”….or practice, in a sense.

We know what to expect, from experience, of the effects of gravity, for example. But the causes of it??? How it and countless other phenomena we have experienced really work??Infinitely more is unknown than is known.

But the practical habit and forced condition of human beings is to “fake it to make it” through the next minute, hour, day, year, etc. Just gettting by, on the surface, is most of my own experience in life .

And I reflect, to my dismay, that without a doubt, I have taken more time and effort to delve below the surface of just getting by minute to minute like an animal does, than the great majority of people out there. Same goes for some of the least knowledgeable people here, I would say. Most are still miles and miles ahead of the bulk of human beings………and way, way behind a handful of persons.

On the topic of mass consciousness, one is, of course, reminded of the infantile mass participation in the spectatorship of professional sports and other forms of distraction and entertainment. Scores of millions watch and render their opinions and vent their emotions and only a tiny handful really know what they are talking about. As if it mattered, in the first place!! LOL.

THIS, on the other hand, does matter, a lot. But I realize on military particulars, I have very little idea what I might choose to jump in a talk about. So instead, I listen and read, or ask questions about some area that interests me, that might add understanding to something where I trust I might have something of value to say of a more general nature that I have put a lot more time and work into understanding.

It’s a process in the individual microcosm and in the macrocosm of “mass consciousness” I would just say that more people may be more dumb and brainwashed than ever, but more (distinct minority, but millions!!!) are more aware and consciously seeking ever more awareness in themselves and others, than ever before in the history of humanity, IMHO.

And (thanks for the opening to really address comments such as Katherine’s on 911) that’s ultimately where “Victory” lies, I tend to think. In improvements in mass consciousness, and important KNOWLEDGE as opposed to mostly irrelevant “popular culture” so-called “knowledge.”

Many here have done the work themselves and are annoyed by the laggards and dead asleep cowards and morons. Most of us have them in our own families, and it’s distressing. We want to cut to the chase and end this thing fast, round up the occult masterminds of 911 and hang them next week. Or if more agapic, at least dissect their brains to see if there are biological causes of such apallingly evil psychopathy.

I reflect on Saker comment on Russian leadership knowledge of particulars in regard to 911. And the dual qualities of endless patience and quick command decision to choose the timing of all moves in the current world strategic situation, in ways that even the most competent in their areas (Saker, L445, etc) comprehend what they know and what they don’t know, what role they can play in assisting those few that probably know considerably more….. across more relevant areas (Putin, Xi…a few in the US, I hope…LOL) and of course the thousands that read here, that affect in some small but important degree the millions that never have and never will visit here, more than likely.

When each makes sufficient contribution to the change in mass consciousness needed for the whole truth (on 911, for example to come out) it just might ALLL come out, in its real essentials!

And that turning that flank alone (911), decisively, publicly and deeply, would be truly HUGE.
Whether a flank on the way to victory or an aftereffect of victory??? I am not sure anyone yet knows……

Meanwhile “patient impatience” !

Patience to prepare all the necessary prior steps, and faith that someone besides me or you (Katherine, I mean) is working on all the important flanks, including 911.

Impatience to keep motivated enough to never give up taking those steps that might assist them in getting to the goal faster, whether one is a young, recent beginner, an old warrior for truth, or an old beginner, here, or somewher like here, for the first time in their life.

I’m an American and I care (yes, we DO exist, I’m not even alone on these boards) but, the sad reality is, no one cares and/or no one wants to know because the truth is too ugly.

Recently, some of my family visited and they just looked at me like I was insane when I said “the only thing I wat you to understand from my study of geopolitics is that the terrorists are ours.[1]” We created these insane mercenary forces to attack our enemies and play the double game like we do with drugs: outlaw domestic use and possession while importing near infinite supplies. Oh yeah, and make a lot of political hay on the “war on drugs/terrorists/poor”. But yeah, none of that mattered. Not even “When the Muslim Brotherhood was kicked out of Egypt, the CIA transplanted them into Saudia Arabia circa 1925 and they fought our wars in Afganistan (USSR), again in Kosovo, in Chechnya, and now, throughout the middle east and, in the future, in both Russia and China.” Really, nobody in the US cares, or, if they do, they can’t stand the horror so they just look the other way.

Sorry to ramble on so but I’m an American who cares a lot and I’m always ignored, even when I can explain without screaming.

[1] As Machiavelli is rumored to have said “to control your subjects you must create enemies and then destroy them.” (I have no idea if that’s an actual quote but it applies nonetheless.)

Larchmonter445 brother, you have great military and strategic comments, and I agree with you that Syria should not start “a sideshow”…………but I would stay out of this issue of “international law” and “international suits over damages” related to the Western-Zionist war-machine.

You mention: “The violations of Syrian sovereignty leave the Coalition and Israel open to international suits over damages. The human toll alone brought by the US to innocent Syrians is worth billions.”

Who is going to enforce Israel or the US to pay for anything ?
When is this going to happen in the historical process ?
How will it be enforced ?

Actually, to everyone who relates international law and compensations with the Western-US-Zionist alliance and their military wars…….do you actually believe that the US, Israel and the Zionist alliance will go through some kind of Neurenberg trials where they will answer for their crimes and pay damages for them in 50, 100 or 200 years ?

Is this a dream or hope of some people ?

When you mention “international law” and the wars perpetrated by the US what are you people exactly talking about ?

The entire international law and the New York based United Nations system (including the security council joke) is a Western-Zionist global setup, linked to their created international monetary system…….and it must be completely abolished.

If you are not able to predict how the US will fall as a superpower, either due to a sudden catastrophic nuclear war or economic collapse, or due to a long term decline/erosion (at the time scale of decades to centuries), where other powers then will able to enforce on the US certain conditions………I would seriously not mention the words “US or Israel” and “international law/compensations” in the same sentence, paragraph or text.

If you have a sound theory and some kind of time frame when such a scenario would occur, then it would make sense to mention it somehow.

after great change, and the resolution of the globalwar will inevitably be a vast and great change, and assuming survivors amount to a large number of people >90 percent perhaps, but many, then there will naturally be a review process and the guilty, whether Ivan or Sam, will have to be trotted out in trials…this is a natural process and it may be shaped bu not prevented. Ivan is not guilty, as we know, but true-guilt has little to do with matters of rhetoric and politik, does it?

There might be a departure, as we see now, from the forms and customs of Law, or not.

Surely trials, even if these cannot address the reality of guilt, are more manageable than a global riot of murder…and better too. But one way or another Vast Change creates scores to settle, explanations to be discovered, history agreed upon and written…and demands for Justice…

And I see that Ivan takes note of the crimes, makes a list… Why?

Why indeed…

Wanna bet?

It would not make surrender easier to know that one is under indictment…would it? Silence, just now, may be golden.

Israel is in direct , blatant violation of some 70 U.N. Resolutions. Also too many international conventions and norms to mention here.

Who is enforcing that?

As far as this article goes, Russia is not up against the U.S/Israel alone. They have the Syrian Arab Army(SAA), National Defense Forces(NDF), Hezbollah, IRGC, Iranian advisors with their many asymmetrical capabilities. Also, Russia has in place many well positioned forces, from elite special troops, to Chechen battalion keeping the peace in Aleppo and others fighting along side the SAA.

No one seemed to mention the Russian Aerospace forces ‘stand-off’ capabilities as far as long range supersonic bombers that can fire missiles and cruise missiles from Russian territories and strike U.S./Israeli ground and naval targets.

Or Russian Kaliber missiles from bases in Armenia and south-western Russian territories.

Russia also has the great submarine force which could put in serious jeopardy U.S./Israeli naval and ground targets.

Another thing is that Iran will Not! let Syria fall, or will not allow a strategic foothold for the U.S./Israel to come to being in the form of Kurds or Wahabbi terrorists. Iran, through the Shia militias in Iraq, Lebanon and Syria will overwhelm such an entity. Its a matter of life or death for the ‘Shia Crescent’.

Airpower does not win wars, boots on the ground does. And The Russian-Syrian-Iranian axis, with their partners, Hezbollah and Iraqi Shia militias spells doom for a broadening of the war in Syria by the U.S./Israel.

It is wonderful to see Israel sweat though, I have to say. Israel knows the ‘writing is on the wall’ for them, to use a biblical phrase. They know that the incompetent Israeli ground army would stand no chance against the Axis I just mentioned. The SAA, NDF, IRGC, Iraqi militias, whom have been distilled down to perhaps the most effective fighting force in the world, through years of intense, attrition like warfare, would in essence eat the IDF alive.

Also, the wish-washy, back-stabbing Kurds better come to their senses and cease and desist from conspiring against the very people who surround them and historically took them in in their hour of need.

Mr. Kadyrov has been begging with Putin and Shoigu to allow his to unleash a division of his hardened and elite shock troops on the terrorists in Syria and their enablers.

You assume two things:
1) that the attacks happen in locations protected by Syrian Pantsir-S1
2) that the Syrians really want to shoot down an Israeli aircraft
I think that you are mistaken on both assumptions.
The Saker

In terms of “internal support”, the last two times the American people have had a chance to express an opinion on going to war in Syria, the answer has not only been “No”, but “Hell No!”

Obama and Kerry tried to use the false flag method to start a war in Syria to take out Assad. The false flag was of course the chem weapon attack in a Damascus neighborhood. Except, two things happened. There was enough opposition to begin with that enough of Congress insisted on taking this to a vote. Then, there was a groundswell of phone calls and emails to Congressional offices that made a lot of them stop and reverse. Calls and messages were overwhelmingly against the war, and you thus saw a sequence where at first everyone was against taking out the Great Satan Assad, but then a lot of Congress started backpeddling, and eventually like a Republican health care bill, the vote got pulled and never happened.

The second time was in the last election. Hillary was firmly in the Kill Assad camp. She openly said she wanted a war in Syria, and she was also very openly hostile to Russia. Trump meanwhile was talking about how the Iraq War had been a mistake, how all of these Regime Change Wars had been mistakes, about how they had left America worse off, and picking up an old American talking point about how it was unfair that the US pays for Europe’s defense through NATO. Trump won and surprsied all the pro-war crowd in DC.

But, this is also a problem for Trump now. The Democrats will reflexively hate everything Trump does. They’ll go back to the Dubya Days and actually pretend they oppose a war. Or at the least they’ll take the Obama line and massively criticize every little mistake that Trump is seen to make. Obama used the tactic of saying he could run the empire better than Dubya.

Trump’s problem is that a chunck of his votes in the last election came from people who like his talk against all of these endless wars the US now fights. Which means he’ll lose some of that majority with which he just won the election. And he didn’t exactly win in a landslide, so he doesn’t have much support to lose.

Mid-terms aren’t too far away. The fields will start forming in just a few months. The party that won the White House is always an odds-on favorite to lose seats in Congress. Democrats are on the war-path, and will turn out to vote for even bad candidates like that Ossoff guy in GA. Meanwhile, Republicans are telling the working class votes that they got for the first time in years that they need to give up their doctors and their medicines so billionaires in Donald’s cabinet can get tax cuts. If you throw on top of that the anti-war majority in the US deciding that Trump and the Republicans lied to them and now are dragging us into yet another Regime Change war and one that involves taking on the Russians, then the Republicans are dead-meat in the next election. Trump can’t seem to get anything done with Republicans in control of Congress. If the Democrats gain control, then the Trump years are pretty much over except for him promoting his hotels.

” Democrats are on the war-path, and will turn out to vote for even bad candidates like that Ossoff guy in GA.”

Not to contradict your analysis.
Ossoff lost. Just saying.
Despite totally outspending the GOP candidate.
‘Dems on the warpath might very well not translate to very much.
Many Dem voters are totally turned off. Swing voters.
Including ALL of the SAndernistas.
Peronally I wouldn’t lay money on the Dems making serious gains in Congress in 2018.

That Georgia House election shows just how weak the Democrats are at the moment. Not only did they lose by a substantial majority, but they outspent the Republican by over 6 to 1. And most of that money came from California. In other words, the Democrats chose to hit that election with maximum firepower and outside Georgia money. What happens if they have to spread that money around the entire country in the mid-terms?

Both parties are controlled by big money interests, especially after Citizens United. The Democratic Party, formerly a party of the working classes, was reconstituted as “New Democrats” (another pro-Wall St party) in the 80s through the Democratic Leadership Council and the Third Way. All the cohort of Democratic Party politicians of that era were neoliberals: Hart, Tsongas, Dukakis, Cuomo, etc.

I remember being perplexed at Mario Cuomo arguing that Dukakis was the “real conservative” not Bush. I thought it was some sort of psyop at the time. In fact, the only real difference between the modern parties is on social issues: abortion, gay rights, etc.

Since that time, the Democrats have come to depend more and more on big money donors, as have the Republicans. Big money interests fear Sanders (a New Dealer). The Democrats have no alternative but to attempt to double down with more Clinton/Schumer candidates.

I think there is an option for Syria and Russia that needs to be stated. Given the formidable defensive capabilities and the cohesion among Syrians and their advisors, all they need to do is to prevent Hegemon from obtaining a quick victory. World opinion, the dollar weakness, unexpected flareups everywhere, the loss of Qatar and other states … all are possible.

Thanks for your support, but the criticisms so far seem to have come from folks who truly simply don’t understand what I wrote. No meaningful flak so far :-)
But I sure hope for some better flak, a sure sign indeed that I rattled their cages!
Kind regards,
The Saker

Nobody’s writing about anti-ship capabilities. The Russians had a sub-killer in the Mediterranean. Is it still there? I’ve read about 200 knot, or even supersonic torpedoes, and hyper-sonic surface-hugging anti-ship missiles. Aren’t the U.S. cruise missiles ship-launched? Isn’t there an intrinsic vulnerability to this arrangement?

yeah, you are talking about the skvall.
forget it. this is not a littoral warfare weapon but a nuke of last resort.
there is, however, a real risk from Russian diesel-electric subs, that’s true.
but sinking US ships is not something the Russians will do if they can avoid it.
Cheers,
The Saker

I posted the following comment on Sputnik 3 days ago. Today I was notified by automatic email that the Sputnik moderator had deleted my comment. The reason given was racism. This was a mere pretext. The comment mentioned no one’s race. I mentioned the Global Elite, I mentioned the Rothschild banking system, and I mentioned that the Trilateral Commission is dominated by Europeans, and it is, according to their webiste, with 53% of their 64 board members from Europe and only 21% from the US. Nothing implied racism.

To my way of thinking, Sputnik deleted my comment because it was true. I hit a nerve.

This is the automated reply from Sputnik showing my comment:

Hello, quemadoinstitute!

Your comment has been reviewed by the moderator and cannot be used.

Comment text:
If the US and Russia were allies, they could eat the world for lunch. The European elite fears this, having the most to lose. Remember, the Europeans, not the Americans, dominate the New-World-Order Trilateral Commission (check their website), and the Rothschilds run the world banking system. Control of US policy by the European aristocracy is too often ignored. For good reason. They prefer the world not catch on to their Russophobic games.

This happened because you violated the comment rules. Please consult the list.

I noticed that Sputnik uses the Facebook plugin for comments… I’m not sure how much control Facebook has through this plugin, but they have been widely known for censoring in the past.

Personally, I don’t trust these proprietary plugins such as Discus and FB. I wonder if anyone in this forum can shed more light on how and why these plugins are preferred over their open source counterparts?

agree, I don’t trust any of them, I’m also wondering why RT is using the Israeli company, most use the well known ones/Discus/FB. That’s like giving the west and easy way to spy on all the people commenting.
But wondering what would be the good open source alternative there?

Weird!
I wonder whether they have a robot looking for certain words.
What would those words be??

I can’t detect any racism.
Except, wait!
You mentioned Rothschild bank.
For many even mentioning this bank is considered to be “dog whistle” anti-Semitism.
For example, in the Macron election, discussing his background and possible water carrying with and for Roth was considered off-limits at the New Yorker (in a story by their Paris correspondent, Laura something) because uttering the name R . Bank was assumed to be a sign anti-Semitism in the utterer.
But, would RT be operating on such a puerile premise?

Hi Katherine, it was not RT, it was Sputnik News. And you’re right, I think the “R” word did it. Now I find it intriguing that this comment was censored. I wonder if it was the act of an isolated mod, or the party line at SN. That would make me read whatever they offer with a giant grain of salt …

@Katherine & Quemado. I have had several comments deleted from the otherwise tolerant Independent UK, and suspected it was because every one of them had the R word. You confirm my suspicion. If so, big R must be to reach at least UK Indie, New Yorker, French press & Sputnik. Case history, 4 cases so far.

More respectable news outlets like RT, Press TV, or Sputnik cannot tell the whole truth either (not even in comments) if they want to operate in the West. So it is not an isolated mod but policy.
Unfortunately there’s no such thing as freedom of expression in western MSM. It is also possible that they don’t even control their own comment boards (some sort of deal).

Anyway, it sure seems that the West(ern tyranny) is considering, planning a desperate attack (and invasion) on Syria, which would mean a worldwide crisis, and the beginning of the end of the AngloZionist Empire.

When making a general comment on the gas wars at Nakedcapitalism.com., referencing Pars (Iran) and the EU – Israel pipeline deal, I also referenced the involvement of the British/French and their Establishment common denominator, the Rothschild bankers.

No rude or racist terms, no mention of Jews or any other ‘trigger’ words.

It was also deleted, for the first time since I began commenting there a year ago.

I’ve also noticed Hasbara operating on Disqus.com claiming any mention of Goldman Sachs, Rothschilds and other bankers is :anti – semitism.’

This is relatively recent, and suggests to me that the banking establishedment is taking active measures to censor online exposure and criticism.

Which in turn suggests they are beginning to get really worried that the opposition can no longer be lumped on with :conspiracy theorists…

The meme that “it’s anti-Semitic if you mention Rothschild” is so hypocritical that it’s funny, given that America and West essentially have institutionalized forms of hatred against their geopolitical opponents, which are normalized and unquestioned by their people.

America in particular has its Orwellian 2 Minutes of Hate in the form of Russophobia, Sinophobia, Iranophobia, (non-Tafikiri) Islamophobia, and state-sanctioned vitriol against North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, and of course Syria.

Any country that opposes–even in limited form–the American Empire and its unipolar world order is subject to vicious slander and propaganda that would make the “Anti-Semiticism” Snowflakes soil their panties if they received even a fraction of such hate campaigns.

Interesting! I received several–6–similar emails for using the term Zionist, which was termed racist, but within the context I used was certainly not. And I’ve often used the term over the several years I’ve commented at Sputnik. At least I now know I wasn’t being singled out, but Spiutnik’s behavior is certainly troubling.

Maybe you should call them (the Zionists) as Ken O’Keefe does: https://youtu.be/bmRiveOge_8 if that doesn’t get you (shadow) banned altogether.
But you’re right, if one cannot even call them Zionists then that’s certainly troubling. At RT there was a time that about half the words of the English language could not be used, but that has become slightly better lately.

Sputnik does not even post any of my comments, regardless of topics. Why? Because I’m one of the few people out there that does not tippy-toe, or beat around the bush. I call a spade a spade. If it quacks like a duck, looks like a duck and walks like a duck, very good chances are that its a ‘Duck’!.

Well, I really don’t use the word ‘Zionist’, I use ‘Talmudic , Khazarian Jew/s’. And that’s where the problem is. ‘Zionism’ , is a recent manifestation of the said ‘Jewish’ problem, and only came about in 1898, while these said Talmudist’s have been at their nefarious, diabolical schemes and murderous plans for millennium now.

It is what it is. That why I come here, because you don’t find that bull-sh$t here.

Anti-War.com, Sic Semper Tyrannis, Moon of Alabama etc, I could go on, are organized gate-keepers to essentially mislead those whom are showing, or have seemed to be waking up to the reality of the threat to humanity these Talmudist Jews pose.

Thus, Sputnik to me is 5th column liberal Russian press, and some of their reporters are of the Khazarian blood-line.

The Saker blog is one of the few sites out there that speaks, and seeks the truth, to matters that count.

And no, I’m not anti-Semitic, as I myself am Semitic. A true Semite.

And whats wrong for calling out said Jews?

What if the people speaking up about the Jews as a race/tribe are not doing it out of hate?

What if the have discovered that this ‘tribe/race’ has seized control of positions of power and influence to enforce a self-serving global Jewish agenda?

What if they are doing it because they see they plight of humanity with all its wars, poverty and unnecessary suffering?

What if they are trying to awaken you out of love and compassion and its being mistaken for hatred and racism?

Mr. Rothschild of days before, in the late 1800’s heavily funded the , just new at the time, Salvation Army. He gave them money on the condition they adapt his name, Red Shield, as their emblem. And lo and behold, they did.

Now, the strange, to say the least, organization Salvation Army carried the ‘Red Shield’ all across the world. The are used as a NGO by various intelligence services, see the CIA/Mi6/Mossad as a subversive organization to bring about certain agendas.

They , the Salvation Army have been kicked out of Islamic countries, China, and Russian intelligence is keeping a very close watch on them. If i’m not mistaken, Russia has just recently banned a whole spectrum of these type of nefarious NGO’s from Russia.

The stupidity level of the western MSM is astounding! A simple review of ww2 would easily clarify the Russian position and long game. Hitler’s anglo/zionist armies were nothing more than the goat herder mercs of today – only that they were much more well funded, trained and armed than the current head choppers.
The Soviets knew full well that they were not fighting Germany but rather a consensus of the western oligarchy that Russia needed to be destroyed once and for all by any means.
The Soviets won against the west by extreme sacrifice – but they understood that only that sacrifice and long game would win. And of course it did with the ultimate defeat of the zionist tool that was nazism.
Nothing has changed – Syria is all about the subjugation of Russia – however, the zionists plan for the ME has collapsed and subsequent Russian destruction halted.
No matter what the US does it will lose – just like Vietnam and Korea. Perhaps the Pentagon understands – however, their occultist masters do not.
One thing is for sure – once the US gets a well deserved bloody nose in Syria there will be revolution back home. The anglos never took on the zionists as their masters so they could take the fall. The propaganda cul de sac will ultimately defeat the occultists – already they are completely exposed.

“Here is a good one: *real* Russian cracking (“hacking” is the wrong word) of crucial US computer networks, including the release of possibly very embarrassing information (think of it as “Wikileaks on steroids”).”

Like perhaps, smoking gun evidence that the Sept 11th attacks were actually false flag terror attacks executed by America (with some help from its allies like Israel, Saudi Arabia, or Germany).

For whatever it’s worth, I am convinced that for all their denials the Russians are fully aware of this and are sitting on top if this info as a possible weapon to use in case of really serious problems with the USA. But yeah – they know, no doubt in my mind whatsoever.
The Saker

I hope you are right but from what I have seen of he deep state control of the media they can make people believe black is white. The official version of the collapse of the twin towers and building 7 defies the laws of physics but the population at large accepts this explanation.

Ike:
You may be right.
But I think there are plenty of polls that indicate that large proportions (like, a third or more?) do not buy the “official” conspiracy theory of 9/11.

Just like similar proportions—more, I think up to 50%– do not buy the results of the Warren Commission.

It is a phenomenon worth intense academic study to figure out the various types of pressures that prevent even robust dissenters from touching these third rails in recent American history.
The taboo on the taboo is so strongly in place. It is like, say, a village where everyone “knows” that some gruesome murder has taken place, but no one dares talk about it.They would just exchange quick glances if the subject comes up.
A society-wide omerta or tacit “agreement” not to talk about certain things—like in a family with a deranged person kept secretly in the attic—that has even the most courageous in its grip.
Any commentator, no matter how sage or penetrating his or her comments on our political and historical situation, has to keep mentioning in passing extremists with box cutters, Saudis, blowback from Saudis, blah blah. Mention as a given the basic outlines of the official explanation and integrate this then into their own analysis of whatever.
Katherine

Maybe you are right, but I don’t think it will play out well for the Russians or the world.

A friend of mine represented a woman in a divorce case. She had evidence that soon to be ex hubby was a drug dealer, and she had been sitting on this evidence for years.

It backfired spectacularly. She ended up looking bad herself for sitting on the information for years, she apparently was alright with the drug dealing until it suited her to reveal it. Any criminal case was, of course, seriously compromised as her testimony now seemed tainted by an ulterior motive. The same will happen to the Russians: they will look bad for sitting on it and (even worse) discredit any information they have.

This is a good reason why Russia (or anyone else that has definitive evidence about 9-11) should release that info ASAP.

If you wait to release it only when it is politically convenient for you, this timing will discredit what you say (and your own legitimacy) no matter how truthful it may be.

Moreover, just think if rock-solid evidence about 9-11 were released in the weeks immediately after this event, the entire War on Terrorism (and subsequent invasions of Afghanistan, Iraq, etc), as well as proxy jihadist wars against Libya and Syria would have most likely never come to pass.

My very tentative American perspective on the Zeitgeist, as regards the 9/11 affair is that most have filed the event in the same folder containing the Kennedy assassination – a perspective that can be summarized as follows, “We will never know…,” possibly spoken with an air of resignation and mild bother that people still are harking on it. Implying that the truth may well be different from the official versions, but that discovering what really happened is impossible – and if it were possible it wouldn’t make any difference anyway. The government is crooked through impossibility of being otherwise. No one citizen can do anything about it, so why bother?
Something similar is occurring with the mass migration of millions from Africa to Europe – a plan described in black-and-white in Coudeneuve-Kalergi’s (founder of the European Union) book, “Practical Idealism,” some accurate extracts of which, translated from the German original, can now be found online. That is, his vision of a negroid (sic) race of Europeans, ruled over by a Talmudic sect, whose genetic quality would be improved by marrying select Talmudics with shicksas of noble stock (I am not making this up).
It is now widely accepted that the money and the ships for the migration is put up by NGOs financed by the usual culprits.
Furthermore, the Talmudic-controlled entertainment industry is increasing the production of TV shows, in which (even in the least contemptible BBC productions), European women are shown having sex with Africans and/or being desperately in love with them.
Propaganda is at work even in pre-schools. The 4 year-old niece of a friend of mine said at home that when she grows up she will marry a negro.
Before anyone shouts “racist” or similar, I have nothing against any (heterosexual) marriage out of love, between men and women of different ethnicities. But its open promotion makes me think of Coudeneuve-Kalergy, and then I wonder…
Saker’s articles on Russia’s strategy and military help raise the morale of the readers. Thank you.

Another factor working against the US vs Russia/Syria model. Turkey is mounting a massive attack on Afrin to drive out the Kurds.

Clearly, the Russians will step aside as they have before when the Turks moved to block Kurdish operations west of the Euphrates.

There will be no Kurdistan allowed.

The US will have a large dilemma in a few days. Its NATO partner will be ripping up its number one proxy for the great Raqqa victory.
Meanwhile, SAA forces are in position near Raqqa to limit the Kurd-USA dominance and sole claim to victory destroying the Caliphate capital.

Where on the map can the US win? CENTCOM looks hapless of late.
Iran and the Iraqi PMU took the border. The numbers of Iranian-related forces is multiplying. Cruise missiles from Russian ships and Iranian bases have the US in a virtual crossfire whenever they choose at al Tanf. In another week, the large force of Syrian troops will enter the fray at Deir ez Zor. Every strategic object on the board is falling into Syrian hands.

The Kurds are now facing a determined, powerful army coming at them. Turkey is about to toss that last great US gambit into turmoil. How long will the battle of Afrin be allowed to go on? The US will be asking Putin to intervene, if he takes their call.

For Erdogan, he sees this goal as recapturing Turkish territory taken for Syria by geopolitics 90 years ago. Killing Kurds to take it back is just added incentive.
The best days for the Kurds and SDF may be ending. And the US cannot do much without them.

“For Erdogan, he sees this goal as recapturing Turkish territory taken for Syria by geopolitics 90 years ago”

“For Erdogan, he sees this goal as recapturing Turkish territory taken for Syria by geopolitics 90 years ago. ”

This is what it looks like to me.
And the Turkish move in Qatar seems of a piece.
Seems like Erdogan is looking at the chaos and seeing opportunities here and there . . .
Turkey also has regional hegemonic ambitions.
The Turks were the “original” oppressors of the Arabs.
Just because they are all Muslims don’t mean a thing.
Remember Lawrence of Arabia?

I doubt that Erdogan will let the Anglo-US screw the Turks again.
I bet there is not a single member of the Trump team who has
even a clue as to what occurred 90 years ago in the ME.
Or, 100-plus years ago, when breaking up the Ottoman Empire and sharing the spoils was one of the main, and perhaps THE main, war objectives of Churchill in the Great War.
Katherine

So the Kurds, seeing the region is in turmoil, are hoping to get their territory recognized. But it seems that no one else really wants that. For the moment, the US is using them (and perhaps the Russians too), but I bet they will be tossed out once they have outlived their usefulness. Sad.

Should plausible deniability won’t be necessary (open confrontation), then Russians have one more card up their sleeve: Kalibr cruise missiles. These can be fired from variety of platforms, which include aircraft, ships, submarines and even land batteries. They can be fired anywhere beginning in Caspian Sea and ending in the Mediteraean. And from these locations they can reach all the way to Persian Gulf.

There’s plenty of juicy US targets for these missiles too, the most obvious being US aircraft carriers.

So yes, US can gain air superiority over Syria if the want, but that won’t give protection to their precious white elephants -aircraft carriers. What sinking of just one of them would do to US military, both in direct damage and reputation inside and outside of the USA is something we can just ques, but my bet is that US is not eager to find out.

Btw.: I am deeply convinced that when Russians decided to use Kalibrs in Syria, it wasn’t because it was necessary for defeat of ISIS or Al-Qaeda, mix of mostly unguided and few guided bombs are plenty enough for that and much, much cheap …no, the main objective was to show American “partners” what these missiles can do and how far they can reach, if need be. Testing them in the military conditions is of course bonus.

Yes.
And it’s not just the Septics watching what the Ruskies can now do.
Over at TASS a week or so back, there’s a piece citing Putin, saying the Russian weapons order book is bulging beyond the brim with orders from all over for some of the war toys on display.

Effective, reliable and affordable. Delivered on time and on budget.

Just *one more thing* to tip the US MIC into a rage induced psychosis.

It seems that Russia can project a lot of firepower under the defense of its own territory. This includes the Caspian Sea (cruise missiles launched from small mobile ships) and Crimea (strategic bombers and cruise missiles). This makes it very difficult for any other power to respond offensively and remove the ships or airplanes from the picture. The NATO and US assets are sensitive to such an attack in the area. However, I’m also a civilian guy and not an expert. It seems a possible move, if necessary. I don’t think that US has a stronger hand in the middle east or bigger power in general. On the contrary, their power is further away from the mainland.

Saker, I was initially surprised that you took on this deconstruction, but I didn’t realize the Bloomberg piece was derived from Stratfor.

Your article was fun to read – thank you. Since Bloomberg and Stratfor indulged themselves in fantasy, it was instructive to follow you through a similar process, except made from real facts. You’ve barely scratched the surface of possible scenarios, but I trust that Russia has thought through all the ones that have any practical basis, while the US and Stratfor haven’t even begun to wake up to some of the possibilities. So this was a good exercise – I hope it reverberates across the many fields of battle.

As for Stratfor, I was glad to see you describe them as rubbish – the perfect word for them. I don’t know if they ever were any good, but for a number of years now they have specialized in pandering to neocon fantasies with boutique essays that pretend to be analyses, but in reality are a kind of pornography for unreal Geo-political ambitions. In lieu of victory, the neocons get Stratfor explaining how the next go-round will be supreme.

And as for the Bloomberg nonsense, I glanced at it and stopped when I saw the same excerpt that you quote here, stating that the US-Russia fight would be “short and brutal”. For some reason I thought of Thomas Hobbes with his Leviathan, believing that early humans led lives that were “nasty, brutish and short” – rather than the wisdom-seeking, sacred and reverential lives that the indigenous and anthropological records show.

When you get it wrong with the sacred nature of things, you are really making serious mistakes. And may this serve as the epitaph for the Zionist dream.

Grieved,
You are onto the essence of the evolution of Powers now in process.
We see great civilizations, whose foundations are spiritual, if very different (Russia, China, India, Iran) stand in the path of the spiritually dead-at-the-core Hegemon and vassals of the West.

Russia preserving the many confessionals in Syria, defending sovereignty and its own security from Wahhabi forces, China investing a share of its new wealth with the stark poor and undeveloped masses of several continents, not just Eurasia, and Iran defiantly resisting the godless US, the godless Israel and the godless Arabs—the three (R-C-I) are powerful multi-pole nations where the sacred nature of things is highly respected.

Multi-polarity is an evolution away from the Hegemony.
The chaos and destruction (the only by-products of hegemony) in the conflict zones are where the energies of the death demons face off against the creative spirits of multi-poles.

You’re telling us that lies can be used against the liar. Any hit wouldn’t be recognized as such by the author and the liar would have to be believed on his word unless he can show very strong proof. I consider it as a nice answer to the “nothingburgers” flying around those days.
The nicety of it is that Reality would catch the “creators of a new reality” at their game. It’s about time that horror stops.
The ennoying point is that those people are able to make their folks live on “nothingburgers”. They would have some factual evidence (corpses ?) to show. The feed would be then enormous. Any believers in such “nothingburger” would feel happy that “he was right to believe in it”.
Russians and Syrians are dealing with congenital liars or even people in absolute denial of the reality. That’s a tough one to deal with.
The advantage is that US lives are so precious to them that any death is a national disaster. Any loss will be unsufferable to them. It keeps the US in lost battles like Afghanistan. Syria is lost but they can’t admit it.

I think the idea is that plausible deniability allows any major player (Syria/Russia/Iran/Hiz b’Allah/Turkey) to strike at US troops and create a political nightmare for the Donald.

I think the idea is the the US military is composed of officers who learned warfare against Iraq and other sitting ducks, but failed to secure the ground war, and enlisted men and women who are basically millennials with military grade ipads, and they would be facing Russians, Iranians, PMU, Hiz b’Allah, and, oh yes, Syrians, who are well armed and quite effective.

If I were one of the generals, I would be seriously considering how to remove the obstacle to peace, and his hair, in whatever way was necessary.

I’d like to make two remarks about the following quote and then to ask a question.

“(The) US propaganda machine has made up so many stories about . . . and God knows who else – how credible will they be when they accuse the Russian of “this vicious and dastardly act” (whatever the act is, really)? . . . Uncle Sam lies every time he moves his lips and while the brain-dead Ziomedia pretends to take each lie very seriously, the rest of the planet, including much of the American public, is under no illusions.”

The answer to the question in the quote that applies to the part of the world where I live in is, unfortunately, very credible. In much of the local MSM, US actions are almost never questioned.

Most regular readers here are under no illusions, but a big part of the planet is under a lot of illusions. This is one of the reasons why the US empire is still intact.

The question I’d like to ask is: Is the Stratfor report an honest one? Could it be fueling a war against Russia by claiming that it’s easy for the US to win it?

I think Saker assumes that US does not consider a frontal attack on the Russian forces and Stratfor scenario discusses such a case.

If the US decides to decimate Russian air bases in Syria with or without any pretext it will achieve that. I think that was the gist of the analysis. Of course, it assumes that Russians would only be limited to its forces in or near Syria for a response, and it also assumes that Russians would stay defensive.

I believe such a scenario would only end up in a nuclear war as Russia would not allow its forces be decimated and probably would nuke the US airfields and carrier groups nearby. Because that is probably the only way they could protect what remains of their forces and the infrastructure of Syria.

There’s (if you can believe it)(it reads very “script-like” and stilted)
There’s a few paragraphs describing (again allegedly) the Pentagon offering Trump 4 options (for his war crime in attacking Syria, base on the April 4 “sarin” false flag).
Option 1: do nothing (rejected outright)
Option 2: tomahawks missiles at the airbase (with Russians forewarned) (Trump supposedly resisted then reluctantly agreed to the warning.)
Option 3: massive bombing of the main Syrian airfields and command and control centers using B1 and B52 aircraft launched from their bases in the U.S.
Option4: Decapitation of Syria by assassination of Assad and heavy bombardment of Damascus (ie/shock and awe, 2017.)

Supposedly Tillerson was curious as to why the B52s couldn’t just bomb the airfield.
He was told this would require protecting the bombers by taking out the Russian-manned SAMs, killing Russians. The pentagon, seemingly, had some strong aversion to this option(according to Hersh).

Those are all excellent examples of what could be done. Except maybe the drawing the US into the DPRK. In that case China would be very unhappy about it. But its the “will” to do something that concerns me. Far more than the ability to do something. If left to the military the will might be there. But with the split in Moscow between the pro-Russia patriotic forces and the pro-Western appeasers in the governing power structure. Its there I have my worries over the will to respond.

Bob, the pro-Western appeasers have zero power in foreign and military affairs.
Name one person beyond Medvedev of that ideological bent in power in the Kremlin. And he’s there as a useful tool, Putin’s toy.

Putin has total command of the nation.
The Intel agencies, the military, the MIC, everything with a pistol to a nuke is under his complete command.
And he has 90% of the people behind his policies.

As for “responding”, Putin shapes the geopolitical battlefield like the General Staff does in military affairs. His response is his action striking first, and others respond to his moves.
The one exception has been Maidan, which was a failure by Yanukovich. Completely out of character, he ran.
But Putin had already the plan for Crimea and he acted on the opportunity.
Donbass was another mess created by Strelkov and the nationalists who wanted Russia to invade. Putin fixed that with Voentorg, North Wind and Minsk 2.
Syria was planned years ahead. Public reports indicated military and Intel on the ground for several years getting the exact information needed for the military intervention to be successful. In four months of fighting, everything was changed across the whole of Syria. Planning, not just a simple reaction.

There is no doubting Putin’s will to respond. Point of fact is Putin is many moves ahead. You can see it since Georgia.

What you must note is what Saker points out. Russia knows its limits. The trick is not to be manipulated into doing what will not succeed.

Russia does not want to invade Ukraine and own it all. It wants Novorossiya.
Strelkov screwed that with his uprising. By now, it is clear that an ethnic cleansing would have been formed against the Donbass without any separatist uprising.
We see Mariupol and Odessa and Kharkiv and small towns under the repression.
If the Azov battalion and Pravy Sektor had tried that in Lugansk and Donetsk from the getgo, Russia could have liquidated them, led an uprising across Novorossiya, and Ukraine’s junta would have been a failure early on. Instead, a separatist war had to be won, and a stalemate installed. Donbass is truncated. But Russia does not own the dying Ukraine. That was the goal once Kiev fell into the hands of the West. The EU and US are burdened with that dead weight.

What Saker is telling us is Russia has its goals. Look for those and you will see how they act and how rarely they fail. They move ahead of the curve.

The Kalibr, the S400, some of their other weapons are game changers. Planned, done, in position. No need to respond. The Hegemon can’t move.

Soon, Turkey, China, India and probably Iran will have S400s, also.
SCO under the Russia network of defenses.
Eurasia.

That’s where we are heading.

It’s not Russia to respond.
What does the Hegemon do? Contain, attack. Really?

Russia with China are many moves ahead in many areas.
Watch what comes from the meeting between Xi and Putin and then the G20.
The next two weeks are going to be yuge, and not for the Hegemon.

“Putin has total command of the nation.
The Intel agencies, the military, the MIC, everything with a pistol to a nuke is under his complete command.
And he has 90% of the people behind his policies.”

I hope you are right.
But a former colleague in Moscow writes (I had commented on “anti-sanctions on selling rocket engines to the USA):

“You are right that the window of opportunities of rocket engines will soon close. Another potential sphere for Russia’s brinkmanship is the threat to withdraw its official reserves held in American T-bills. However, on the one hand, this step is dangerous for the global economy. On the other hand, if Russia decides to withdraw its reserves, the USA can freeze them ahead by using any pretext, as it happened with Iran’s foreign reserves in the 1980’s.

There are also two obstacles for adopting such active actions by Russia. First, it seems that Putin wants to deserve a dove of peace image. Another problem is the influence of hidden opposition in Russia. I mean the so-called liberal block of the government, a part of outward-oriented big businesses, and some top-level bureaucrats having big assets abroad. Putin does not possess an absolute power and has to account for their influence. In a sense, this situation mirrors what occurs in the USA, where debates around new sanctions against Russia reflect domestic political problems. Russian authorities may be reluctant to impose the new anti-sanctions by the similar reason, as the US neo-conservatives may be willing to impose new sanctions on Russia”

And something massive which is about to happen is the finalization of Russian-Chinese currency exchange systems to finance trade, not only in oil & gas but a broader range of commodities & manufactured products. This will be a huge blow to the dollar & a another major blow against Anglo-Amero hegemony. When Power of Siberia goes live that will reduce Russia’s dependence on the European market, I think at that point we will witness a significant increase in the Kremlin’s assertiveness towards their western “partners.” Russia is in this to win, & win she will, no doubt at all. As for the American hegemon, some people are going to be in deep shock as to how fast that edifice will crumble & collapse. The establishment of a cooperative ethos as the multi-polar world system is established will have a revolutionary effect on the entire world, it will change the base principles that governs the world today & set them on a harmonious rather than adversarial trajectory. Not much comment about that at the moment, but there will be in good time.

Yes, the US does have a tendency of screwing up royally when they have superior numbers. Of course they just pass it off as part of being the exceptional, indispensable country. ARRGGHH, any time I say or type those words I can’t help but see that strutting turkey Slick Oily (Obama) in my mind!

History is fascinating, and it’s usually at times like these that a Black Swan flies overhead to radically change the tangent of events, maybe in the form a of an isolated military mutiny (“Aurora”) or economic crisis.

Still, from a strategic point of view, why would the Russians engage in anything but asymmetrical warfare? Might as well form 19th Century military squares as operate in any sort of ‘conventional’ formation, especially against Daesh who were never much more than a brigand army.

No American….and I mean not one, and I am one, would ever risk his home, or family, or lifestyle over Syria or any other foreign misadventure of the neocon zionists…. too me it seems that the strongest message that Russia could ever send is a fully armed submarine 20 miles the coast of Washington DC with a message from Putin in English with a 1 hour countdown timer…..and he speaks English it well….are you ready to loose everything at home due to your governments hubris and drive to rule the world…or would you rather live in peace within your borders and and with all countries. We Russians, most of us will survive as we have built bunkers to protect most of our population…..but ask yourselves why your government never did the same for you and your families….result…global economic can panic, markets crash, people panic, and the Washington power elite realize that they are done….US backs down…..Americans revolt against their elected officials….and as soon as the financial markets sense that its “game over” and the global hegemon gene is put back in the bottle the markets will rebound. One way or another if Russia is pushed enough, and into a corner, the result will be nuclear war. So why not control it now and force the endgame on the American population….they are collectively smart and will chose to continue to live at the expense of the crazies who have ruled the roost for decades…

Re Turkey extending their operations again….MFA indicates “supposed” chemical attack could be in Idlb region……hmmm..providing cause for all those moderate rebels to be reinstated….but then could they join forces with the Turkish actions….P!us increased actions from Israel working to some mad tune in concert?

That could be very plausible, when you look at the map provided by Katherine below. And let’s not forget that the “rebels” from Aleppo have been evacuated in that area. Probably they have spent their time with preparations for a revenge. The Turks have a great deal of headache with the Kurdish forces along their southern border, I doubt that they would want to intervene again in Idlib (painful memories of shooting down the Russian plane and the consequences)

” there аre reports of some unnamed but very secret Russian unit working in Syria (for example here) but neither Vympel nor Zaslon fit the bill”

Some Russian military-connected sources have suggested that the same Russian team that converted the Donbass militia from a rag-tag collection of farmers, plumbers, shop-keepers, hairdressers, etc into a flully capable military force are now in Syria.

“For example, during the battle for Aleppo there have been numerous reports of Russian snipers killing Daesh leader one after the other almost decapitating their entire leadership.”

There are similar reports of high level ISIS leaders meeting an inexplicable and untimely end elsewhere in Syria e.g. within the last few days, the entire ISIS leadership of he pocket in Daraa has been eliminated.

“Now imagine a Russian operated Pantsir-S1 crew in Syria shooting down US aircraft or Russian operators blowing up a tent with the HQ of the US forces in Syria. Not only will there be no proof that the Russians did it, but even if there was, nobody would trust the Americans anyway. Furthermore, this also begs the following question: would it really be in the USA’s best interest to point the finger at the Russians? I would argue that it would not.”

A few days ago, residents in Tartus and Russian commentators reported an unexpected S-300 missile launch towards the eastern Mediterranean. There were unconfirmed reports that the target was a US Global Hawk. Both the US and the Russian military said nothing. Normally, the RUssian’s would fire two misisles at a suffivciently dangerous target to ensure a 100% hit. A single missile could be just a warning? Currently the Russians have issued NOTAMs for the eastern Med warning of potential missile launches in the period 28-30 June.

The point taken as “,,,The willpower, courage and determination of the Russian solider is stronger than his US counterparts by many orders of magnitude. …” can be true in a rigorous sense only if murka4threichforces have nearly zero willpower courage and determination…

Yes, it is dead right at least as far as courage is concerned. Scratch a Westerner and you’ll find a grovelling sycophant with a sense of entitlement to other peoples’ labour output and natural resources. Of course such a Weltanschau breeds a fringe of militant parasites to whom straight-out fascist terror becomes the preferred way of taking on the world, but even in such a state of madness the cowardice usually prevails: “Hell, I don’t want to die for Zion, I want to kill for it”.

When cia wrote agitprop biography of V. Belenko they managed to tell a true story in one significant part – the Soviet Officer Pilots watching film of wild weasel missions over vietnam asked salient question – how are capitalist pilots motivated?

“Oh, they,re very well paid”

Ok, How much to they get paid to die?

Is fair question. Fair reply too.

Getting paid is a lower quality than other motivations, like family, blood, soil, history, clan and so forth… Nice enough,and a risk young men will take, up to a point…

The Russians will go out of their way to avoid any military confrontation with US led forces, now that they have pretty much accomplished their goals in Syria or are close to this state.Russia’s own interest are only in part overlapping with Syria’s goals.
1) they have established a strong naval and air force presence in the eastern Mediterranean that would enable them to keep an eye on US./NATO concentration of troops in this geographic area which is close to Russia’s south west borders. Goal achieve 100%
2) They have rescued Assad’s secular regime and are about to help him re-establish control over 60%-70% of Syrian territory; goal achieved 70%
3) They have pretty much obliterated any Qatar plans of running their gas pipes to eastern Syria ( now the Turks go with Russian pipes instead); accomplished 80% at this point
4) They have eliminated a lot of the jihadist leadership and many of their foot soldiers many of who were from Caucasus and Central Asia and who pose direct threat to Russian internal security. This is work in progress which will not be finished in our life time; Goal accomplished 50%

In the aforementioned context, the Russian’s have no reason to escalate. Assad does what Russians and Iranians tell him to do, having long lost both its economic and military clout long ago.
It will be interesting to see what the Russians/Iranian/ Assad troops / Hezbollah and the Irak shia militia men will do if US intends to force a military control over the south east border arund Al Bukamal area. The order form the world hegemon ( Israel and the Jews) is to prevent at all cost a land link from Iran over Irak to Syria for fear that this would be used to strengthen Iranian’s influence on Israel’s borders. If Iraki military with Iranian support and Assad and Russians will move fast to this border town (max 5-7 days from now on) they might have chance to beat to Jews mercenary forces to this border area. Otherwise, the area would be lost to hegemon and its allied forces at least in the short term. I think medium and long term the hegemon can not keep that area under control unless they establish e permanent military basis right around that city (Al Bukamal); the local are pretty hostile to any intruder ( be it Shia or Jews/ Americans)

Surely the main Issue for Syria is the US military takeover, replacing daesh and occupying yria permanently east of the Euphrates.

“It looks like the US may be in for another occupation of another Middle Eastern Arab country against native guerrillas. And it looks like Syrians may be in for a lengthy US occupation of the eastern half of their country.”

If you mess with Putin, you also get Xi (mutual defense treaty). Neither of whom are fools.

Putin is quite probably the best Russian leader since Peter the Great. We have ‘community organizers’ and a real estate mogul. imo, Xi is on par with Putin wrt leadership skills and abilities.

In America, we’ve outsourced much of our manufacturing, and we’ve limited access to our own natural resources. Russia has the best heavy machinery manufacturing in the world w/ currently untapped natural resources, including oil and gas. China has only one competitor wrt high tech manufacturing …and it isn’t the US.

China has a larger ‘brain trust’ than the US, w/i over 300 million geniuses and near geniuses than the US has people. They have more men of military age than the US has people.

We have a hi-tech, expensive military machine which is very expensive to maintain and man, let alone replace… and often does not work as advertised. e.g. The USS Gerald Ford, the F-35, etc.

In a war of attrition against either China or Russia, let alone with both,, the US will, eventually, lose (refer: NAZI Germany. Hi-tech, expensive war machine. e.g. Empire of Japan air power in the Pacific.)

e.g. If we lose one or more aircraft carriers in a war with Russia and China, how long will it take to build a replacement and train the officers and sailors to man it? Where will we get the money and resources? Our economy is maxed out (budget, debt, etc.) The Russians have one of the lowest debt to GDP ratios in the world.

These are just a few considerations of many. There are numerous additional factors to consider before we *try* to take down the Russians…especially with Putin in charge.

Are the South Koreans willing to be the sacrificial lambs in the Asian theatre?
(I recall one war – gaming poster here in the Vineyard proposing exactly that… quite an insight into the mentality that informs US foreign policy ‘.)

Your point of ‘plausible deniability’ is exactly the right danger to confront the US forces with, It caused them to flee the Lebanese civil war in the eighties of the last century. ‘They’ were actually shelling US Navy ships, and they had no clue who it was (at that time some 33 armed militia were present in Lebanon), and ‘they’ suicide-bombed a complete Marine HQ: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Beirut_barracks_bombings It was never claimed, but most plausible it was done by Hezbollah.

In this respect, wouldn’t it be needed to install a lot more of these highly moveable Pantsir units in Syria? Because it’s reach seems somewhat small to me.

I understand the hesitations to down an IDF or USAF plane, but in doing that (‘sending a message’) those parties will be more reluctant afterwards.

And let’s remember the first time, some years ago, that the US Marine and the Russian Navy almost stood face to face on the coast of Syria after the flase flag sarin attack in Goutha. It was said that almost a mutiny broke out in the US forces, who refused ‘to be the air force of Al Quada’.

First of all, I have encountered quite some comment of people who like to stay ‘anonymous’. I’m sure that having a nickname like ‘I’mkeepingsecret123’ doesn’t help either, but I would like to know whether the ‘anonymous’ from thread 1 would comply to the ‘anonymous’ from thread 4. I fully understand that we are reluctant to give away personal things, but at least I want to know to what digital entity I’m talking to, okay? I leave it to the Saker (it’s his site) and his moderators to guard this.

Ok, let’s go back to what you’ve posted.

I think you have a good point. Eventually they would have shooted. I grant you that. But you have to see the bigger picture.

The main point is that you have to sell the losses at home. Families see body bags flowing in, and they will ask questions whether they died by whom, and doing whatever cause. Loosing a son or daughter is an almost unimaginable thing, going against the natural going of things of Mother Nature. Parents will be in ultimate grief, asking why, by whom, and by doing what. If these questions can’t be answered, grief will be accompanied with anger and don’t underestimate that.

Try to imagine that thousands of body bags are flowing in, without any meaning by whom they are killed, what for, and for what meaning (‘regime change’, that guy on the telly told me). If it were your child, how would you react?

Therefore I took a parallel with the supposed intervention of the US forces in Lebanon. They had often no idea who they were exchanging fire with (like most militant factions there anyway). Try to sell that story to the family of the deceased.

in bombing retreating Saddam forces in first gulf-war us pilots did, I understand, begin to object to the obvious war crime…is mutiny? Maybe just the smell of mutiny… Bet that is not going to be permitted to happen again…the pilot officers are now…where? But then they were junior officers…

but real “mutiny”, eg a change of Policy in OTAN/4threich/murka mindset… Ask, is this a realistic idea?

No. Not now.

Possible? Do not hold your breath…

Is what must happen, and what cannot happen, ergo…in engineering physics is called “singularity”

and that’s the way it is…

Therefore it must be so, and that leaves the really big questions revolving ’round the entire matter.

Round the matter?

Of course, because Strategy called for is indirect…now watch his Mona-lisa smile…

And ask how…and where…

Is obvious…but those whom the gods would destroy…and the gods use the faults they find…and make the blind man throw rocks until he stumbles…on his own rocks….

Yes indeed, Strategy calls for coup in some places…

Is realistic? We shall see, maybe. Cooking takes time…well, normally anyway. Of course if you cook with Pu…

……the USA have poured billions of dollars into this region to make sure that the Soviet Union could never successfully invade Iran………I did not know that SSSR wanted to invade Iran. Are you sure about this statement?

At W2 end Soviet forces remained in portion of Iran. Truman threatened to use nukebomb on these troops if they did not leave…. possible that this brutal dictate not without undesirable result…Ivan long memory, Iranians also have long memory, murkinz not so much…pity.

Nice analysis. But I notice you don’t mention Russia’s electronic warfare capabilities. If they are as effective as they are made out to be, then the likes of the Krasukha 4 and Khibiny are far ahead of anything the Empire has got. Could they not make a big difference in the event of actual conflict breaking out?

Here’s one indicator of how the balance of power is presently stacking up between the US and RF.

Looking at this large parcel of land literally sitting between the US and RF, Canada: For those who don’t know, the North American Free Trade Agreement is about to be modernized (which I think is kind of like “re-negotiated” but that term is crimespeak right now for some reason.)

Canada’s ambassador to the US, David MacNaughton, says “It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that at some point, if they keep doing things that harm Canadian companies, that it’s going to be difficult for us to resist doing the same.”

This is about geography – in this unique region (that is, in Canada, the land mass between the two powers), we can get an indication of the power differential between the US and RF.

The Canadian ambassador to the US made an assertive statement in reference to major, sovereignty-defining, trade negotiations with the US. The only time a Canadian diplomat can make a clear assertive statement (such as that one) is when there is balance between the two powers.

I am suggesting that the RF presently (and openly) counterbalances the power of the US, no matter what is happening militarily in Syria, the Donbass, or elsewhere. This one indicator (that is, the presence of an official, publicly-disclosed statement by a representative of the Canadian government, challenging the US in a significant trade negogiation) reveals everything.

It’s over. The unipolar moment is no more. The Russian Federation is back — with immense dignity, subtlety and asymmetrical responding. Capably defending it’s geostrategic interests, to Canada’s benefit.

(And I would expect that US NORTHCOMM will dissolve in the very near future.)

You certainly have a point, and from a legal point of view there are statutes of limitatoins that limit how long one can wait to bring litigation, say, for damages. THe person bringing a claim for damages waited too long after the time she putatively knew about the damaging behavior. The clock was assumed to start running from the time she knew of the behavior that she subsequently said had damaged her.

However, I don’t think international gamesmanship is subject to any such concepts.
If someone, anyone, came forward now and produced evidence relating to 9/11, or the Kennedy assassination, I think the interest in the evidence would outweigh any attempts to downgrade the info on a type of ad hominem basis. But there certainly would be interested parties who would try to impugn the source of the information, or the motivation in releasing it. Still, just releasing teh knowledge that one has or may have such info could be as subtle a weapon as just releasing it. Letting the world or the enemy know you have info can be lethal, for either the enemy or for oneself.

Since most of the world probably accepts that the official 9/11 story is not true, releasing new info would have the greatest consequences for the USA domestically. I should think. Depending on what the info is, it could trigger or hugely exacerbate a legitimacy crisis of or for the US govt.

‘Or a sort of Second Law of Thermodynamics situation (is that the one about conservation of energy?)’

To illustrate my geekness, it’s not. Conservation of energy is formulated in the first law of thermodynamics, the second law describes the natural flow of energy.

Don’t worry, whole masses on universities still don’t understand the implications of it. E.g. our mortality is a result of it.
Despite the fluffy words of our dear leaders, Mother Nature likes a minimum of energy and a maximum of chaos (or a maximum of probabilities), and will energy flow naturally to reach that.

I think the best comparison is Germany-France-Switzerland (in previous centuries). Pepe Escobar wrote something about Singapore, suggesting that Singapore occupies a similar geographical position (and manages it very deftly!)

At the height of unipolarity, the US military unilaterally created NORTHCOMM, which covers all of Canada. This means American forces can R2P their way all across this nation, at will. I’d expect that Ivan will see this as a threat to his national security.

So I heard a rumor (dissidents talk to other dissidents, it seems!) about all this chatter on Canada’s involvement in Five Eyes, suggesting this is proof of Canadian support for imperial conquest.

It turns out (according to anonymous sources :) that Canada is using the Five Eyes branch to track the liberal imperial foot soldiers, who have been moving into our cities and buying property (how ’bout those housing prices???) The intent is to disrupt/water down Canadian culture, so it’s indistinguishable from American culture, making it easier to take over the country (or at least, these cities along the southern border.)

Judging by the vast reduction in revolutionaries on the streets here in Vancouver, I assume someone noticed that with Russia’s return to superpower status, it makes no difference who is in power in Canada. The regional geopolitics will limit America’s influence in Canada due to Russian national security concerns.

Someone posted a YouTube video of Antifa posters in Toronto. Maybe Soros didn’t receive the memo that a color revolution serves no purpose anymore in Canada.

I have been reading your articles since the Ukraine crisis in 2014, and this is the first time I write to you.

Sharp analysis in this article, as usual. However, there are some things that bother me. For one, I do not think that US internal public opinion really works in Russia’s favor. It’s a non-factor. Say, if the US decide to do a 2003 Iraq style invasion in Syria right now, what can the American public do to sway it? I don’t think they have any sway in it because the US gov’t is very adept at ignoring and silencing their own public voice.

Same with external public opinion. You already stated that the US’ blatant disregard of international law can affect US’ standing in the world, I do not see how it can stop them from doing what they want. The US still preach about international law while ripping it apart as I type this, and they do not seem going to stop anytime soon.

I also do not think that the US will be fazed by “plausible deniability” methods. It takes a sane person in power to take a hint from those methods, and frankly, I do not think that such person exists in the US.

– It is very well possible that Russia already hit some US soldiers who were embedded with the rebels.

– One of the biggest developments at the moment is the attack of the Turks against the Kurds, with silent approval of the Russians and the Syrian government. It is another type of asymmetrical warfare for which it is hard for the US to find an answer too.

– Trump has his own neocons – Ezra Cohen-Watnick and Derek Harvey – who are so fanatically anti-Iranian that Cheney and his ilk look like moderates. How will this work out?

– The US has one big “advantage”: it doesn’t care about its own people or public opinion.

If direct conflict between Russia and the U.S. breaks out it will quickly turn to asymmetric warfare and not be confined to the Syrian Theater.

Within the Syrian Theater only, Russia would still be at a disadvantage. But every ship and base the U.S. uses to launch strikes against Russian forces becomes a legitimate target in war. Russia has the capability to strike the U.S.’s vast array of assets. U.S. assets become a hindrances once they become targets because they are soft enough to be struck. Russia has less to defend and what they do have is less exposed than U.S. assets.

Iran has the capability to strike U.S. assets in the region too. There is no such thing as a strike against Russian forces without the expectation that Iran will mutually defend Russian and Syrian forces. War with Russia means war with Iran and Hezbollah. Can U.S. and its “allies” defeat all of them and at what cost?

The only thing preventing all out war in Syria is Hezbollah’s capability to decimate Israel. But that same reason is why the West will continue relentlessly since Israel will never accept that they actually have to get along with a neighbor in the ME.

War is not a logical solution but Religion and Money cause people to make those illogical decisions.

Asymmetric Warfare (hopefully short of nuclear war) is in our future. Enjoy your internet access while you still have it. It will be the first casualty when the war really goes hot. Disadvantages to that? Doing business without internet will cost outrageously. Advantages? The MSM can control the propaganda much more effectively.

Satellites as well as infrastructure will be legitimate targets. Warmakers don’t mind, they will make money on the rebuilding and dumb citizens will be begging them for those overpriced critical infrastructure projects.

Would there be much point in killing American generals in the Middle East? Aren’t the decisions, even down to quite a low level, made in the Pentagon/White House/Israeli lobby? It would be politically embarrassing, but perhaps not of much practical effect, and would send the Americans into hysterical demands for revenge.

“But there is another side to this story: since the US propaganda machine has made up so many stories about genocidal Serbs, Viagra-enhanced raping Libyans, baby-tossing Iraqis, wannabe-nuclear Iranians, barrel-bombing Syrians and God knows who else – how credible will they be when they accuse the Russians of ‘this vicious and dastardly act’ (whatever the act is, really)?”

Amusingly, it could backfire in the exact opposite direction as well: The faithful MSM audience gets the message all right but feels there’s not much that can be done about it. Interesting times ahead for Indispensable and exceptional peoples.

As usual we are missing the forrest for the trees. There will be no direct confrontation between US and Russian forces unless they are planned and executed in a theatrical display not unlike the recent US cruise missile strike on a virtually abandoned airfield in Syria. It is the same arrangement which prevails at the United Nation where professional actor-diplomats engage in absurd displays of shoe banging on tables, or petulant pouting, whatever the script writers demand.

As in that situation, when Donald Trump announced the missile strikes on Syria directly to his host Xi Xinping whilst sharing chocolate cake, both sides will relay self-serving information to domestic and supportive international audiences while pursuing narrower domestically targetted objectives and simultaneously moving ahead with mutually agreed upon actions furthering various unipolar/multipolar institutions and other arrangements of an extremely well advanced New World Order project.

These are partners as the Russians continuously remind everyone, and that includes China which recently hired a Hong Kong based firm run by Erik Prince (yes that Erik Prince, he of Blackwater fame, and whose sister was recently hired to be Education Secretary for the Trump administration) to set up bases and guard the entry and exit points of the (Opium) Silk Road from Yunnan in the south to Xinxiang in the north.

In China.

Of course Russia under Putin has a more humane agenda but he represents only one pole in a complex dialectic/trialectic arrangement whereby Oligarchs the world over move forward with agreed upon actions. Sometimes they fight but when agreements are made they are always ultimately executed. Not everyone has malevolent intentions but the people reading this website are unquestionably excluded from direct participation in all decision making.

Therefore, by any supposedly Democratic standard, the NWO project is completely illegitmate. Vladimir Putin, bless him if it helps you sleep, is making the best of a situation but it is completely beyond his control. He receives help from people like Oliver Stone who seek to strengthen his moderate position against the hateful screaming Zionist banshees we all know so well, but that help is only given to the extent that the secret nature of how we are governed remains secret.

And those Zionist banshees are not a peculiarity of Echelon or NATO countries, or the City of London for that matter. They exist within Russia and China just the same, which is why a traitor like Navalny walks the streets of Moscow without any fear.

Reading this site you might forget that Russia is as much under oligarch/deep state and Masonic/intel influence as is any Western nation. You might also forget that all media is controlled either directly by intelligence or by the internal calculations of people who operate within this medium and seek to establish a position of influence for themselves within the towering New Babylon.

Your comment is very illuminating–though not in the sense that you intended. It fits Saker’s description of a particular category of comments that periodically appear, perhaps to push a certain type of psyops:

“I noticed this time again that each time the US tries to bait Russia into some kind of harsh reaction and Russia declines to take the bait, this triggers in immediate surge into the number of comments which vehemently complain that Russia is acting like a pussy, that Putin is a fake, that he is “in cahoots” with the US and/or Israel and that the Russians are weak or that they have “sold out”. I am getting a sense that we are dealing with paid US PSYOP operatives whose mission is to use the social media to try to put the Kremlin under pressure with these endless accusations of weakness and selling-out.”

Pro-American trolls don’t always openly support the American Empire and its wars of aggression.

They often will attempt to discredit any resistance to the United States by asserting that this resistance is secretly in cahoots with America as part of the New World Order (NWO).

Indeed, the NWO meme itself has become a favored propaganda meme deployed by pro-American “alternative” (i.e. controlled opposition) media to tacitly uphold American global dominance by shifting attention and guilt away from the United States.

“For those US cannot threaten or eliminate directly, it kills via its propaganda. Character assassination is one of the favorite weapons of the United States of America.

Since US cannot be seen as a positive force any more, the only thing that is left for its propaganda is to discredit the opponent. To do that, the US needs to twist the reality in such a way that the opponent is painted with the tainted brush.

In other words, US is not interested any more in proving that it’s a force for good in the world. Alas, it’s too late for that as everyone’s aware of the truth. USA isn’t trying to show it’s not the driving force behind NWO. It is abundantly clear that America has lost the fight for the hearts and minds.

Therefore, USA’s new strategy is to paint everyone else with a tainted brush, so everyone seems tainted as much as the USA, and this especially concerns Russia and Putin.

This is actually a brilliant tactic, which easily confuses people – even the smart ones. This is called “I am going down, but I am determined to drag down with me everyone I can.” Will it work? Short term – yes, as it confuses people and slows down the progress of transitioning to a better, more equitable society, not based on US hegemony and US dollar dominance. People start questioning if it’s even worth protesting, or getting to the bottom of the truth, if all global elites are corrupt equally.

[…]

When the tainted brush propaganda technology is turned on, distrust and confusion are the result. These lead to paralysis and inaction – and this is exactly what they want to achieve! They want the majority to be passive and subservient, and the smarter minority to be passive and distrustful of all. Mission accomplished!”

Note to commentator … I found this comment contained personal attacks on another commentator … this blog is for the discussion of ideas and events and not for ‘cat fights’. in the future please stick to the ideas and subjects …. mod

I do not recall having heard of a “pro American troll,” not recently, though I’m sure someone must be using this term when it serves their purpose, as you just did, perhaps moreso in the Russian speaking world than in the Anglosphere. This is because web sayanim are primarily responsible to the Transnational Zionist Elite, and their Masonically inspired institutions of total control, including the CIA, MI6, FSB, and seek to destroy the United States just as they seek to break Russia into smaller, more managable and less threatening pieces. Not all of them mind you, not Putin I am relatively certain, but the vast majority who are trained to be politely sociopathic Aristotelean Aristocrats and in full control of the minds of defferential undermenchen, and who don’t give a damn about what some of us may or may not hold dear. These people work on an entirely different level, and like you, work together with tens of thousands of others in thought control projects publically proclaimed by the likes of Cass Sunstein, and find it more useful to blame the United States, a thing, instead of focussing attention on thepeople who work daily to undermine our understandings and keep us chasing shadows. I prefer to focus attention, laserlike, on the oligarchy and their too well paid intelligence operatives, who themselves are trained to focus on the space between our ears as a primary field of battle. I am no fan of the United States per se, nor an enemy anymore than I am of my own country Canada, but I do draw a distinction between these virtually meaningless nouns and the people who control and manipulate this contrived logos, or for that matter any nebulous thing such as Israel, the Pentagon, NATO and etc. Ask 100 people what Israel means and you will get 100 completely different answers. Some will see their blood pressure double immediately upon hearing the word. People like you operate within this space of confusion, never specifically saying what you mean because for you truth is an anathema.

I see you do not address any of the points made in my post, describing the conduct of international leaders such as Donald Trump and Xi Xinping, and how they mock the the people of Syria raining down death via cruise missiles whilst eating cake a la Marie Antoinette, at least theoretically if you believe anything you read, divying up the spoils of the opium trade, as reported by your own CNN, so you know it must be true, or torturing the heart of humanity by pillaging Palmyra, our common heritage, not some nebulous g-d damned thing but what is dear to any empathic person forced to endure abomination heaped atop abomination. You coward.

No, you are missing the forrest for the trees, just like I said, and this is intentional, your strategy being to misdirect and confuse, just as you weakly j’accuse then attempt to associate me with things I did not say, employing the tactic of inversion, implying others are guilty of exactly your crimes against consciousness, anonymously lest you risk the hard won credibility of one of your carefully constructed identities, making a fool of yourself.

For the record, Putin is a politician and the President of Russia. He can no more participate in politics than you can jump in a swimming pool and not get wet. The nunce is missing on someone like you and so you play up the confusion in an attempt to undermine what I did actually say. Nice try fella, but you are too lazy to actually address what has been described. No one but the most studious reader will follow your link and for them I have already destroyed your non argued argumention. They know you are blowing hot air. When people see the truth they know it in their heart.

The United States is a large country with powerful institutions and therefore just as much a target of those vying for uncontested control of everything, just like Russia, lest the enormously powerful institutions of the United States or Russia, theoretically under Democratic control, fall into the hands of people who might use this influence to counter the power of the Transnational Zionist Elite. There are historic examples of this occuring, including the Presidency of Andrew Jackson, or perhaps Joseph Stalin once he came to an understanding that his enemies were the enemies of the Russian People, but I can’t know. I can only know what is the agenda of my enemies and when I identify it I will come out with all guns blazing, because those of us who can think for ourselves and make it a practice to do so are wise to your deceitful and anonymous trickery.

It seems to me that trying to identify moles, trolls or disinformation agents is really a waste of time, and just results in people constantly accusing each other of posting “propaganda” and “psyops”. This simply leaves everyone mutually mistrustful and confused.

One problem is that it will never be possible to detect such persons from opinions they post. Anything can be interpreted as malicious. For example, the criticism of “Putin” or the “Russians” for being “weak” could be a psyop. On the other hand, it may simply be that there are a lot of people who deeply resent the United States and it’s current position in the world (for their own no doubt, legitimate, reasons) and want to see it defeated and humbled, and are disappointed when this doesn’t happen. So I don’t know how such a determination can be made or who is capable of doing it.

Actually, any disinformation strategy must necessarily provide a lot of accurate and useful information. Otherwise such an agent will be quickly ignored and rendered ineffectual. Chomsky has been identified in this way by many but much of his work is very valuable and a useful stepping stone to understanding the world.

I would suggest one should listen with an open mind but verify significant information. Make your own decisions about what information to accept or reject without reflexive accusations.

Gotta wonder if several choice battalions get some unexpected additional live fire training in Syria’s desert in tandem with SAA advances on Al-Bukamal and Dier Ez Zor, which might be the mysterious “with dignity” response Lavrov hinted was in the works.

Some extra aspects:
-Russia can use the Iranian airfields if needed
-Al-Abadi will be under tremendorous presure to liquidate the American presence if Syria is attacked on a large scale. The PMU can mobilize a million men, so how can one win a war and partition Syria with just the aviation? As long that Turkey was on their side, they still had some hope, but now it’s ridiculous.
-Iran would certanly not sit down.
-Israel can certanly cause damages, but they will be unable to sustain a long war of attrition and invade Syria without some major proplems

Is this an elliptical statement? Taken at face value, selling the almost latest and greatest Russian defensive missile system to a NATO country seems, at the very least, odd. Are they crippled/Lite versions with back door neutering? I am no weapons expert but it would be good to know what’s going on here -what the bigger picture is all about?

Trying to challenge the article I find the arguments and ideas thin based.

– US dont give a damn about their public reputation and revelations in any way.
– Needle sticks from the Russians against US in Syria are also laughable. Americans think big.
– Plausible deniability is pussy footing, irritating but no real challenge for US.
– You cant win an hippo attack with “more war experience, better moral” among the sheetahs.

The facts is:
US have heavy superiority in the area.
US has promised to fight Syria in 100 years until it falls.
US maybe waiting until Syria is close to victory and exhausted, to attack big scale.

What I see as possibilities:
1. Shoot down/sink the source of attack, US Carrier, Destroyer, F35, US Base, etc.
2. Assymetric attack on US Qatar base, US base in Germany, Romania, Turkey, m.m.
3. Immediate bombing/deletion of the 5 most important US military bases in Syria.

“The author of the article, a civilian with no military experience, makes a basic mistake, he assumes that the Russians will act like idiots and fight the kind of war the US would want to impose upon them.”

People with a long history have a genetic memory which promotes survival. Scientists only now realize that human body cells record history: periods of starvation, drought, plagues, illness, wars. Not just in “The Brain” but in every cell of the organism: it’s called antibodies. Russia is made of Russian people who, for centuries, have gone through everything humans can go through and resisted it all. They have a memory of it all and the knowledge of what to do and when.

The same way that specific cells in the body will fight intrusive infection and create antibodies designed to immunize it forever against a similar attack, while allowing the body to keep functioning, specific cells in a cohesive population will fight intrusion while keeping on functioning.

America knows all about creating viruses, weapons, wars, destruction and chaos. America has no clue about God’s creation and how it really functions. America, in its enormous hubris without limits, forgot that “science without conscience is ruin of the soul”. Whose soul? The victim’s or the perpetrator’s?

Russia is currently focusing on two things: keeping the body going (making sure its civilization keeps going) and making sure it is not attacked from outside. Not in the Bill Gates, Soros or Washington military ways America is croaking from. Russia is a natural, living body. It uses natural, living, proven methods.

Sorry, I am very knowledgeable about computer security, and while that statement is technically correct, that ship sailed LONG ago. Even infosec experts use “hacking” and “hackers” these days. There’s just no point in trying to correct the public’s incorrect use of the term “hacker.”

As for the threat US Special Forces in Syria represent, I would not underestimate that. By now, there are probably several thousand of them in Syria – another 400 just deployed to a town on the Turkish border – and they have long-range artillery pieces in place now. I believe they are being put in Syria precisely for the purpose of eventually taking on the Syrian military and if necessary the Russian military in Syria, supported by massive cruise missile and air support.

As for not being able to knock out the Pantsir systems, I’d say that depends entirely on the situation that develops. Eventually the US WILL be able to knock out most of the relatively fixed Syrian and Russian AA systems, and probably only a handful of Pantsirs will remain operational. The issue will be how many reloads these systems will have while running around the countryside evading US drones, US fighters, and US cruise missiles. Once the US achieves air superiority over Russian fighters – which WILL happen within probably 72 hours or several days – only those AA systems will be keeping US fighter-bombers and literally hundreds of cruise missiles from devoting their time to knocking those same AA systems out.

Yes, the US won’t be entirely successfuly, and yes, the US will lose perhaps some dozens of jets in the process – much to the shock of the clueless US population – but in the end, the result will be the same. Once Russia and Syria air defenses are down, the US – and NATO – will bomb the Syrian military, the Iranians and the Hizballah forces into the Stone Age. That’s the entire goal of the Syrian crisis.

The question at that point is: How far is Russia willing to go to defeat that? At that point, we’re really talking about risking WWIII. It won’t matter if Russia takes steps in Ukraine or Afghanistan or wherever. The point of the Syria crisis is to get a war with Iran started. Nothing Russia does outside of the Middle East will change that.

The only real way Russia can stop a mass US/NATO attack on Syria is to sink the US fleet in the Med and the Persian Gulf, bomb Incirlik in Turkey (risking war with Turkey as well) and CENTCOM in Qatar, and perhaps threaten to bomb the Saudi oil fields.

In short, WWIII. The US will have no choice but to respond to any such attacks directly against Russian forces. It won’t matter who started it at that point.

So far, the US hasn’t had the nerve to just outright attack Syria with the Russians present precisely because of the risk of WWIII. But if the US and Israel want a war with Iran, or at least a “cheap war” from Israel’s viewpoint, they are going to have to take out Syria’s military and Hizballah’s missiles first. And if Russia is prepared to prevent that, then they will have to prove it at some point, and the US will have to decide whether they can proceed.

This is the real question. And once ISIS and Al Qaeda has been defanged in Syria, as General Mattis just said, that’s when the real SHTF will occur.

I think the US would just assume and without the benefit of evidence Russia is the party attacking its forces and act accordingly. This is par for the course for the US–who need evidence anyway? Secondly, skipping over the Russians, the US is more likely in response to undetermined attacks on its forces to go after Assad directly and in a very big way thinking that with Assad dead what has Russia to fight for? That, I think, would be demoralizing for Russian troops in Syria. But, as rumor would have it, an overwhelming pre-emptive strike against Damascus aimed at killing Assad is probably what is being readied for as we speak.. Something Russia has warned against, but has no way of preventing.

I wonder if Trump’s recent threat against Syria represents the fruits of Kushner’s recent meeting with Netanyahu. Maybe Netanyahu promised some “peace process” in return for regime change in Syria, which is how the Israelis often manipulate American politicians.

2, It does not seem likely that Russia is in Syria in order to oppose West, nor even to uphold Assad’s rule. Much more likely reasons are: a, to decimate takfiri global resources (mainly manpower) b, benefits for Russian army and IMC

3, despite all the successes of pro-Syrian forces, baathist Syria is gone. These is no way Kurd-held territories or even Idlib would be integrated to it.

The Danger of an imminent attack on russian troops is small. The Russians are everywhere on the ground, implemented with the syrian army. An attack on russians has already been answered before, with an immediate Kalibr cruise missile attack on foreign intelligence assets (aleppo province, >20 cia,mossad,turkish deaths if the story is true). This means:

A direct attack on russian troops would see the aircraft carriers sunken within a short period of time (maybe minutes not hours). The russians can and would detect an ongoing attack on them timely and would prepare. After that the american side would only have their bases in the region as their start options to gain air superiority. But then its up against the S300, S400, BUK, Pantsir and ship-stationed defence systems.

Such an escalation would also call Iran to its allies and open the possibility of russian troops in Iran. The russians can deploy and redeploy troops faster than the US can achieve air superiority.

There will be no attack on russians, the Syrian game is OVER for the US, long time ago (fall of aleppo). With the turks turning up the heat on the kurds, they now even have to choose between incirlik and raqqa. In the meantime Syrians should be able to reach Deir Ezzor.

The economic option of dumping the US dollar is, I believe, the best overall move the non western nations could make to end the insanity world wide. Gold has been flowing from the west to the east for decades now, and now is the time to start using it.

One book I always recommend about how little the United States culture has changed in its fundamental relationships with the world is Bernard Cornwell’s “The Fort”. Paul Revere (yes, that Paul Revere) played a huge role in the greatest naval defeat in US history in 1779. This is history left out of the American citizen’s psyche and a nation’s PUBLICLY acknowledged history. The wars of empire since 1945 see an ugly continuum with a list of miscreant militarism.

In this analysis, you depicted substantially more positive outlook of Russia’s ability to withstand concentrated attack of US military might.

Indeed, Russia started to behave much less assertively since then. It likely coincides with Flynn downfall and subsequent Trump’s U-turn. But are there any hard facts on the ground (in the military sense) that made you change your mind so dramatically ?

I would appreciate any comments or insights on a question that has puzzled me for quite some time now. Why doesn’t Mr. Putin just call Washington out on the 911 lie and put an end to America’s fraudulent reason for being in the Middle East in the first place. When are world leaders going to put an end to the whole of humanity being held hostage to the ridiculous official story of 911, when surely they all know it’s complete and total B.S. ?! Are they all just a bunch of controlled puppets, including Mr. Putin, or are they all just trying to reserve the right to lie to their own citizenry with their own false flags? Seriously, I have great respect for The Saker and for all the commenters on this blog and would appreciate any and all insight. Thanks in advance.

Within the comments, there is frequent use of the phrase ‘transnational elite’ — or something very similar. The word ‘elite’ is clearly being misused — a case of confused notions, caused in turn by unconscious acceptance of deliberately misleading propaganda.
Rapacity, cunning, cruelty, deception … since when do these qualities define human excellence? Why not instead say, simply and more accurately, ‘transnational robber barons’?
Many comments refer to ancient cultures (R, C, I, I). Each of these had standards of human excellence vastly different from what today’s so-called ‘transnational elite’ typify.

Like always, Stratfor assumes that the only Russiantroops that would be involved in this imaginary battle are the ones already stationed in Syria. Because, gee, the Russians wouldn’t nuke us for attacking and destroying all their forces in Syria… this level of idiocracy is so contrived and delusional it’s … not funny, just sad.

I’m sorry you had to waste your time attempting to counter Stratfor’s bullshit, there’s really no point, it’s all about “we could win IF the Russians don’t nuke us AND they don’t reinforce their forces in Syria AND our planes can succeed against Russian E-War AND the Chinese decide that it’s good that we beat up on Russia AND that our gear doesn’t suck rocks. Oh yeah, and Santa Claus is real. AND we’re more exceptional than you.

Dear Russia. please, try not to nuke Texas, my family lives here and well, at this point, I suppose I’d just understand if you did.

I’m just so sick of American agitprop that I have a hard time ignoring ignorance. I could easily leave another 20 comments calling out the lies but, well, that’s too much.

I try not to get upset about geopolitics and try to stay away from posting, especially in anger, but how can I not…

FWIW, I don’t see any real point in publishing this post, I’m just trying to explain my 5 comments before I got more than 20 posts in. The world is so full of lies that I can’t help but try to address ignorance and the American Fairy Tale. I’m done now but I’ll be back later when, once again, maybe I can stand to stare into the abyss.

“Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster… for when you gaze long into the abyss. The abyss gazes also into you.” ― Friedrich Nietzsche

I think Russia will lay down the ground rules when war looks imminent with Russia. this war would not be limited to just the Middle East. Russia could engage US targets all over the globe from within her own borders. High value navy targets would be plenty full in the Black Sea in the Med in the gulf of Oman and the South China sea area. The black Sea would be a Turkey shoot and how much of a financial blow would it be to the US if half their flat tops were sent to the bottom in just a few hours
a half mill$ S 300 would be a good swap for an F 18 hornet. Would the rest of NATO have the stomach to die for the US. How would Europe react if she woke up one morning to find ten Chinese armored divisions and 200.000 Chinese troops facing them from the Russian side of the border.
Don’t forget, the Russian’s were in no great shape to take on Hitler but they are well tooled up for the USA.

Thanks for the analysis, pleasure to read (compared to other ‘analysts’ scribblings).
I’d just let’s say “disagree” even though my opinion doesn’t really carry much weight :),
with regard to S-400.
I don’t think Russia will be able to play dumb, I don’t think US would allow them to, not for a long at least.
In any such case (if plausible deniability is invoked) I’d say the first “counter” move on part of the US would be to force Russia out of the hiding, simply by provoking them “hard enough” (e.g. by bombing the hell out of Syrian army or something strategic enough, I don’t really know enough but I’m guessing that’d not be a problem) so that they’d have to react, by deploying the S-400.

But we also have Iran that could be used as a proxy? And they have S-400-s I think, not sure of the ranges involved. Turkey will have them seems, but not sure how that plays into all this, just rumbling.

Anyhow, I’m of opinion that’d easily escalate, if it gets to deniability. The question is whether anyone side would wish to pursue that (and risk point of no return) as I’m sure all the combinations are well worked out.

Hmmm . . . It really does seem from some of their rhetoric that the Americans think they are “Re-Afghanistaning” the Russians . . . but what if the Russian & Syrian strategy is that they’re “Afghanistaning” the Americans.

The goal may well be to improvise and route around the damage when the American play their games, while taking the occasional casualty as the Americans expend vast quantities of cash and resources . . . to achieve . . . almost nothing!

and that loss was probably necessary because the Kurds quietly, without making a public announcement, refused to reinforce al-Tanf after the US threw them under a bus by refusing to intervene with Turkey when the Turks launched an offensive designed to cut off the Kurdish enclave in the North-West of Syria.

Sitemap

Saker Android App

An Android App has been developed by one of our supporters. It is available for download and install by clicking on the Google Play Store Badge above.

All the original content published on this blog is licensed by Saker Analytics, LLC under the Creative Commons CC-BY-SA 4.0 International license (creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0). For permission to re-publish or otherwise use non-original or non-licensed content, please consult the respective source of the content.